What ball are you playing?

Equipment
#84

I only heard of one incident from long ago where real money was involved, but nothing from this group.
The supposed sandbagger was chased out of town.

I used to call people out for not being totally honest with their score when any bet was riding on it. That was long ago. I’d let it slide these days even there is a few dollars riding on it.

I tend to stay away from the general pool of “fun betting” because I know there are a few fudged their index. Only play with the guys in my group like $5 Nassau.
I don’t understand those guys who collect the weekly trophy knowing they are not 100% honest with their index. Often joke that they should just go buy a trophy if they need it for display in their man’s cave. It’ll be cheaper than the green fee.

1 Like
#85

In my heyday I used to play for serious cash/ $25 automatics, $20 junk, and $50 Bingo/Bango/Bongo or what was even more fun…Chase the Wolf! However, when you played with these boys it was at scratch. So you better have had game and cash! My current group we play for 25 and 50 cents so it’s just bragging rights for the week now!

#86

Personally, I don’t bet for more than what the green fee ( total potential winning or losing).
Some of the guys like to bet a lot of money when they play golf. I don’t.
I won’t get too excited if I win and I certainly will feel the pain if I lose. I don’t even participate in the Calcutta at the annual final for the group.
One time at a skeet and trap meet, someone bought me for $75 and won over 2 grant ( in the early 80s) never offered me to buy half of that back, which is customary.
Our group game is the optional $15 total for all the junk bet. Within our group we could add maybe $1 skin, with doubles for birdies and triples for eagles. There are other groups who will play a little more.
The most I had witness on a golf course was in the early 80s when I visited some friends in L.A. when those guys were betting a grant per hole with automatic press. I backed out since I could not afford to lose anything close to that. They were business owners, I’d assuming they all are doing well in the go-go 80s.
My father warned me about betting in this game when I was young, because he also witness some very large sum changing hands over a game of golf and a few got hurt financially plus broken family.
I don’t gamble on the golf course except for a few dollars, which amounts to a couple of drinks on the 19th.
In my sphere, one time a guy lost $50-$60 after 18 and that was pretty big considering back then the green fees were $20-$40. The winner paid his share of lunch tab for him so it’s pretty friendly.
I know there are games around here for $100 Nassau plus junk bets. But those are out of my league.

#87

I switched balls last year to the VICE Pro Soft. It plays very well, doesn’t get confused with others and has many of the characteristics of the Pro V. Price point is acceptable. Friendly around the green. worth a try.

#88

I keep trying everything out there…I’m like the dog in up…”squirrels!”. I recently watched a Rich Shiels review where you got a hold of the original ProV1 ball from 2000 (or thereabouts), and put it up against the current version…almost identical in every way…feel, spin, distance, and flight…I was blown away…20+ years of marketing and the ball hasn’t changed much…WOWzer…just got my hands on the new Mizuno RB Tour X balls…I have a SkyTrak at home so I like to compare all the different balls I can get my hands on and see how they compare.

1 Like
#89

No manufacturer wants to market several different lines of the same model, one for conforming and one for recreational use. It’ll not be cost effective.
There had been a few off brands golf balls advertising “none-conforming” for distance, spin, or size in the past. Non of them exist today.
Forget about the “ball fitting” which is a marketing tool for the golf ball companies, just the same as the 10 more yards from the new drivers each year. The important element in selecting a golf ball for personal use is is mostly depending on “feel” .
The rule of thumb is, the higher swing speed will benefit from a higher compression ratio. Of course, the lower swing speed will benefit more from a softer lower compression golf ball. Then, there is the “show-and-tell” factor of playing the most expensive brand/ model available.
The dimple design has a lot to do with the ball flight. The larger dimple will cut through the wind easier and a lower trajectory, the smaller dimples will provide additional lift for higher ball flight.
I used to tryout each of the new on the market models each season and yet to find anything as a miracle savior for my golf game. Used to have a brick and mortar store which will sell single sleeve for 10% higher than the boxed retail for golfers who wish to try before commit to buy a whole box.
Plus, I often find the lost orphans on the golf courses, some of these are premium golf balls which had only seen a few golf swings. Some are budget golf balls, which will go into my shag bag, and some beat up ones will go to fill the driving range buckets.

#90

My driver swing speed is 80-85 so I’m clearly in the realm of lower compression “soft” balls compared to many of you. I work with a simulator and have been doing some ball testing comparing Srixon Soft Feel and Callaway Supersoft and in this comparison, the Srixon has performed better. A few weeks ago the manager of the facility had me try Callaway Chrome Soft with the Truvis pattern as they have been having trouble with the simulator picking up spin values. Defying all odds and expectations, i was getting better launch angle, tighter dispersion and about 2% more carry with this ball and this makes no sense to me. I shouldn’t be able to use that ball to advantage. Now, I’m no Iron Byron but I do hit the sweet spot quite often and my swing metrics don’t have much deviation so I’m pretty straight and consistent. Of course, I’d rather pay $22/doz than the $45-50 for the Chromes.but it just seems crazy to me that the Chromes might be slightly better for me. Thoughts?

2 Likes
#91

Most the thing in life will fall under the order of the universe.
However, we all know the few incidents when the unexpected turn out to be a better choice.

I would say, gather the data from the simulator and take it to the golf course. Use it for a whole season through the warmer drier days and the moist cooler days. Then you would know for sure which golf ball is really better suited to your golf game.
That would be only for this season and who knows what will bring the next season. Weather might change and we all age one additional year.
IMHO, the 2% improvement from the launch monitor is for reference and not the final say. I doubt that you could discern the 2% improvement on the golf course. I have no idea about your finance situation, but for more than doubling the cost?
I can still swing the X or XX flex driver shaft in front of a L/M; for a few swings anyway. But I know I could not swing that shaft for the duration of a round or two of golf. The wheels will come off after a few holes. No one could give me 40 years back.

#92

If you like the Chrome Soft performance, but not the price maybe see if you can try an Oncore Elixr. It’s also a softer ball with a urethane cover and they sometimes have sales where a box is closer to $20; I think they are regularly $30.

1 Like
#93

If that is what one is looking for; the Kirkland Signature * 3-piece Urethane Cover Golf Ball is $35 x 2 dozen. you can do the math here.
It is a no brainer when comes to price point.
Some review said it sounded a bit clicky, I can’t find the compression rating on these. Having played it in the past, it will stand up to any other 3 piece urethane covered golf balls
Some stated the KS urethane golf ball stands up to 90 compression. Definitely not 80 or lower but than again the OP is not looking for a softer golf ball but experimenting with the Chrome Soft brand.
I’d give it a try because many had been using this golf ball and loyal to it.

#94

May not apply to slower swingers. (Or maybe it will?) But that ball spins. A lot.

You might find it ballooning on you. Others have claimed needing a half-club/club more at times. My experience? I was hitting moonballs, but then I was doing that with nearly everything. Fixing pitchmarks on my driver, LOL.

Tried ballnamic, for $hits and giggles, and it put me in Volvik S4s. Which are rocks, but spinnable ones. With ProV1s as the second choice, LOL. They do seem to fly further than the Kirklands, FWIW.

1 Like
#95

The O.P. found he was getting more out of a slightly firmer golfer ball.

The overall review of the K.S. golf ball is needing close to 90 MPH driver swing speed to rip the compression benefits. This is what the O.P. was looking for.
The dimple design is more for lifting than boring ball flight. You must have over 90 MPH driver swing speed. I like the larger dimple design myself.
The K.S. golf ball will fit a lot of the amateurs golfers for the extra lift from the dimple design, since most the amateurs do not have enough launch and apex height in their ball flight trajectory.
Plus, one could not beat the price.
O.P. should try it out and split a 2 doz. package with a friend and find out for himself if the K.S. golf ball will suit his preference.
Plenty of the golfers who are using Pro V1 whom I know could not compress the 87-90 compression.
I used to game 100 compression golf ball with larger dimples design, Used to be anyways. Now I find 85-90 compression is perfect for my current condition.
If I find lost golf balls on the golf courses, I would definitely put the nicer ones to play without hesitation.

1 Like
#96

Nice added detail, Dew. I was mainly going by my own experiences with it and also with the MyGolfSpy ball test results, which showed the Kirkland being a considerable outlier on spin.

Most of my problems that day, you could place on me of course, and many of the rest on the Ventus Red I was trying. Fantastic shaft, but yeah, it claims to be a high launch shaft, and that’s exactly what it did. The Kirkland ball didn’t help.

Though I did impress my BIL with getting that ball to hop and stop on a 5-iron from 190. So golf goes.

1 Like
#97

I found the 3 piece KSig ball to be noticeably shorter off the tee than pretty much any other ball I’ve tried. It reminded me of the original Bridgestone e5. I can’t say I noticed obvious ballooning, but it just didn’t go anywhere for me and I can’t afford to lose too much yardage since I’m generally 230-240 off the tee with a few going farther when I’m on. Otherwise I liked the ball and you can’t beat the price.

It’s too bad they don’t make the 4pc KSig any more as that ball could match any of the high end balls for performance at least for me.

I tried the Oncore Elixr late last year and liked it. I was able to get 2 dozen for $40 which I thought was a good deal. I only played 1 round with it, but it seemed to work as well as anything else. Last year I generally played Maxfli Tour X and Vice Pro (and Pro Plus). I tried most of the “premium” urethane balls and the only one I didn’t like was the Bridgestone Tour B RXS; I just hated that ball from 50 yards and in as it didn’t seem like it actually had a urethane cover.

1 Like
#98

LOL, The Bridgestone Tour B RXS was fitted to me online. Never tried it because other golf balls in the same price category are proven better for my game.
I too, also found the K.S. golf ball shorten the driving distance for my game by 5% or so. Have no idea if that was due to less rolling out or the flighted distance. My golf game is so inconsistent these days, and the off season golf course condition really wouldn’t make much difference between the golf balls except for the driving distance off the tee.
I have a collection of New In the Box golf balls and a few test golf balls to go through when weather turns warmer and drier.
Have not get on the L/M for data in recent years, I want to believe my driver SS is till over the 90 MPH ( so it looked pretty good on the driving range ). A more realistic check up will be actually playing off the tee from a few long par4 and par5 which I know where my tee shots normally ended up.
It is a never ending chase, just like the other golf equipment, although, the golf balls are easier to switch over and involves less cost doing the switch.
I’ve settled on my driver and irons ( between a selected few sets ), Probably need to change the shafts in the hybrids for a little more distance. I’m search for a reasonably priced hybrid shafts now. Might need a couple for the basic set of two.
Still monkey around with my putter selection. I have a Scotty which I putted consistently, a few other style of hosel design and some oldies more than half a century old. Recently I acquired a wooden mallet putter and it feels fantastic off the family room carpet. Will take it to the putting greens when it is not too wet. I don’t like to refinish the wooden putter heads. High maintenance is the only thing I dislike about these putters made of wooden head.

#99

Me too and I thought the original one years ago was nice. Last year’s model reminded me of the original AVX I tried where it was fine on full shots, but I couldn’t control it chipping or pitching. It just seemed to play like a 2pc ball without a urethane cover and you can get those for a lot less. I like the Tour BX a lot better even if it’s not recommended.

#100

I played a lot of golf with the Lee Trevino’s endorsed top-Flite rock. Liked it because it cost less and I could spin it when needed. From there I evolved into some 100 compression golf balls. After there was a lot more options for the golf balls, I just look for a bargain on the premium brand. Did stay with the Penta for several years.
Liked the Prov1X a lot but didn’t like the price tag.
The Bridgestone RX, RXS I had tried and thought them as okay. Went back to a firmer feel for the drier season then a soft compression during the off season months.
I had tried almost every brand/model when they were introduced and narrowed down to the Bridgestone Tour ( Fred Couples endorsement ) and the ProV1X. Taylormade Penta until it was replaced by a 5 piece ball which was okay.
Still have many NIB golf balls in the closet, the leftover from buying in bulk to save shipping and cost per box.
If I stop buying new golf balls and not picking up stray golf balls from the golf course. I should have enough new golf balls to last me at least several years at 40 rounds annually.

#101

The winter is the off-season for me. Recently, I was bored enough to do an on-line ball fitting at Ballnamic. Like everyone else, it recommends the Bridgestone Tour B-X and Tour B-XS (along with my current Snell MTB-Black). The main difference between Bridgestone and Snell, according to Ballnamic, is how they compare in the wind with the Bridgestone getting very high marks. I bought the B-XS on sale for $1 more than Snell since the Snell is currently unavailable.

I usually come out of hibernation once during the winter to play Bandon Dunes. I was there the first week in February. The temperature the first day was in the low 50’s but the wind is gusting over 30 mph. So, is the Bridgestone better in the wind than the Snell? My anecdotal evidence is yes – it has a more penetrating ball flight and seemed to be less affected. I don’t think there is a lot of differences otherwise.

2 Likes
#102

Dimple design might be the difference of the performance in the windy condition. Usually the size of the dimple makes the largest impact then the group pattern.

1 Like
#103

I have been playing the ProV1 for a while but am getting towards the end of my stash. Typically I play the lower spin tour model but not really a brand loyalist too much. I usually stock up when they run sales or close out last year’s model for the latest and greatest. I am going to test the new Callaway line up of CS, CSX and CSXLS to see which one I like the best and if I want to switch from the Titleist.