MyGolfSpy Ball Lab is where we quantify the quality and consistency of the golf balls on the market to help you find the best ball for your money. Today, we’re taking a look at the Maxfli Tour from DICK’S Sporting Goods. An overview of the equipment we use can be found here. To learn more about our test process, how we define “bad” balls and our True Price metric, check out our About MyGolfSpy Ball Lab page.
I’m not sure if it qualifies as common knowledge but Maxfli now is a house brand of sporting goods giant DICK’S Sporting Goods. Sorry, folks. DICK’S doesn’t own the rights to the Noodle franchise.
DICK’S Maxfli Tour lineup consists of two models; the three-piece Maxfli Tour and the four-piece Maxfli Tour X. One of the differentiators, if not the selling-point, for the Maxfli Tour family is that the balls are CG (center of gravity) balanced at the factory. DICK’S has invested heavily in what is essentially an industrial-strength Check-Go-Pro device. The process aligns the sidestamp with the golf balls’ center of gravity. While DICK’S stands behind the quality of its product, CG balancing is an extra strep that it believes makes its balls just a bit better than those of its competitors who compete at lower price points than the Titleists and Callaways of the world.
In this report, we take a closer look at the Maxfli Tour golf ball and let you know how it stacks up against other golf balls on the market. Finally, we’ll give you the True Price – how much it costs to get a dozen “good” golf balls.
About the Maxfli Tour
Data collected during our 2019 golf ball test shows the Maxfli Tour to be a mid-launch, mid-spin ball. It features the familiar 318-dimple cast-urethane cover common to numerous direct-to-consumer golf balls.
The Maxfli Tour is manufactured by Foremost in Taiwan, among the most reputable of the top-tier Asian factories. Notably, Foremost produces balls for Vice, OnCore and Wilson.
The stated price for the Maxfli Tour is $34.99, though DICK’S offers discount pricing multiple times per year
Maxfli Tour – Compression
On our gauge, the average compression of the Maxfli Tour is 92. In what has become a familiar refrain, that’s similar (two compression points firmer) than the Titleist Pro V1. That qualifies the MaxFli as firm. With its thin cover, it should feel similar to other balls in the Tour-level urethane category.
Maxfli Tour – Weight and Diameter
- All of the balls in our Maxfli Tour sample met our standard for roundness.
- None of the balls tested exceeded the USGA weight limit of 1.620 ounces.
Like most true Tour-level balls, the Maxfli Tour runs a bit on the small side (though none threatened to fail the USGA ball track test). As we’ve noted, a smaller ball is typically a longer ball so the diameter is appropriate for the category.
Maxfli Tour – Inspection
Centeredness and Concentricity
As with other three-piece balls, core issues typically manifest themselves as layer concentricity issues (the core pushes to one side, forcing the mantle to be thinner). Thin spots in covers can also be an issue.
In total, we flagged six percent of the balls in our Maxfli Tour sample as bad. The balls in question each had uneven mantle layers paired with uncomfortably thin spots in the cover. It’s a defect that can lead to inconsistent spin performance, particularly around the green.
In total, minor defects, which are unlikely to cause performance issues, were observable in 44 percent of the sample.
Core color consistency was generally excellent throughout the sample with nothing odd or otherwise noteworthy.
Cover
While we found the occasional pin mark (common to most balls), there were no other notable cover issues.
General Observations
The cover on the Maxfli Tour is familiar. The identical cover be found on several other Foremost balls. It’s neither the thinnest nor the softest in the category but it’s also neither thick nor firm. Greenside performance (65 yards and in) should meet expectations for the category.
Consistency
In this section, we detail the consistency of the Maxfli Tour. It’s a measure of how similar the balls in our sample were to one another, relative to all of the models we’ve tested to date.
Weight Consistency
- Consistency (of weight) across the Maxfli Tour sample is good.
- Weight variation between the heaviest and lightest ball in the sample was minimal.
Diameter Consistency
- Diameter consistency relative to the other balls in our database is good (above average).
- Diameter consistency appears to be a strength of Foremost. Diameter consistency is high average to good for the majority of Foremost balls we’ve tested.
Compression Consistency
- Compression consistency for the Maxfli Tour is in the middle of the average range.
- When we look at the consistency across the three points measured on each ball, the Maxfli Tour is slightly above average.
- With a range of nearly 11 compression points across our sample, there’s a bit more variation than we’d expect from a premium ball.
True Price
True Price is how we quantify the quality of a golf ball. It's a projection of what you'd have to spend to ensure you get 12 good balls.
The True Price will always be equal to or greater than the retail price. The greater the difference between the two, the more you should be concerned about the quality of the ball.
Maxfli Tour – Summary Report
To learn more about our test process, how we define “bad” balls and our True Price metric, check out our About MyGolfSpy Ball Lab page.
The Good
The Maxfli Tour stands out for its general consistency with both weight and diameter consistency qualifying as above average. Likewise, within only six percent of the balls flagged as bad and roughly 50 percent overall showing some defect, the quality of the ball appears in line with others in the value-priced/direct-to-consumer urethane category.
The Bad
We have some concerns about the range of compression across the sample. While 10 points isn’t extreme, it is a bit on the high side. Not directly related to our sample, we have found some evidence that occasionally Foremost can release a run of bad balls into the wild (often in a single box). We didn’t find that with the Maxfli Tour but it is something to be aware of.
True Price
The True Price of Maxfli Tour is $37.06 a dozen. At just a bit less than six percent above the standard retail price, it offers good value in the category.
*This content is backed by the MyGolfSpy Integrity in Advertising Promise.
Robert
1 day ago@Tony, I love these ball reviews. I’m a bit of a number geek so I appreciate everything that goes into it. I’m consistently looking back at the previous ball labs to compare. When is the Z up?, I switched to Zstar after your eye opening 2019 ball test.
Nick Costanzo
4 days agoBased on this article, I went to golf galaxy yesterday and bought some of the tour green. Here’s my unbiased opinion:
#1. Absolutely loved the matte green finish. It’s super cool.
#2. Full shot performance. Distance was solid and spin on full iron shots was on par for a urethane tour level ball.
#3. Only objection and deal breaker…feel off the putter….it feels like a damn rock… I’ve played every urethane tour level ball and this thing just feels wrong…. I’m not sure why it feels so bad because the compression isn’t much different than a pro V1, but if you game a tour level ball you will be completely let down on the putting surface. I’m wondering if it had something to do with the matte green finish on the ball.
I’ve also played the Q-star tour and that ball feels like a normal urethane ball… Soft feel on the green.
YMMV…
T A
5 days agoBeen playing Maxfli premium balls ever since Dicks brought them back some years ago they are the best convert people to them everyday the matte does not perform as well the yellow and white are great the tour off the tee is a few yards short of the Snell but more than makes it up and then some on the irons the tour is awesome from 125 yards in they sit the pro vs will over spin this ball is first rate and two dozen for $50 is a deal only ball I will play and I am 63 and still hit it 285 to 300 and I can not find a better ball if you play you will continue to play distance is perfect but the real strength is from 125 in
Bruce Baum
5 days agoYou have tested a lot of balls at all price points. 2 questions always loom up. 1. How many hits before a ball gets out of round, and as an example of my age (82) how would any of these compare with 50 years ago the BLACK DOT? Or any wound ball? I still am hitting the ball @ 90 to 95 mph. I Iwork out 4 to 5 days a week and am only concerned with accuracy as I have no problem with distance. Thank you
John H
5 days agoI’ve used these balls over two season here in the northeast. My biggest issue with them is the cover. On many balls you will find a defined “equator” where the two halves of the cover meet up. Others it is difficult to find. This indicates quality control issues to me. Which could lead to consistency issues in your game. Even though I have found the performance acceptable I have moved away from them.
john wagner
5 days agowould love to see a review..if you havnt done one yet..on the new taylormade tour response ball..thanks
alex
6 days agoI tested these after the MGS test last year. saying it was good for slow swing speeds. It seems to be pretty good– but whenever I put a full swing on a sand wedge the ball scuffed. (I am 90 mph driver speed).. For me, the ball “bruised” or scuffed easily– usually on a thin iron shot. . If I am playing a “ball eater’s course”, I still might use these.
shortside
6 days agoI’ve been playing these since MGS introduced them me to them. Haven’t looked back. They’re a great value and very consistent in my experience.
Only “complaint” and it’s a minor one is the matte finish. They do require constant cleaning. I hope they follow Vice and do away with it. Big fan of the lime green. Easy to find.
Paul M
6 days agoI bought a dozen Maxfli Tour matte green balls last week, I played them on a Monday round, they did feel firm but that’s not a problem for me. I shoot high 80,s – low 90’s so I spray my fair share of balls off the tee, I found the matte green balls easy to locate, our grass here is green turning a bit brown from lack of rain and change of seasons, I actually played one ball the whole round which was nice for a change. the Maxfli is a good value, I also play Snell MTB-X , and I am testing Quantix F35 Control and Vice Pro balls as well . Feel wise the Maxfli is same firmness as MTB-X the Quantix and Vice Pro feel little softer to me, I’ll have a better opinion after a few more rounds.
Paulo
5 days agoShooting those kind of numbers you may be better going for a more forgiving golf ball
Carl
6 days agoI have used the Maxfli Tour model, just a bit shorter off tee then the 3 piece Kirkland (maybe the close to being the same ball?) I would bet when the 4 piece Kirkland comes out again it will be close if not the same as the Macfli Tour X. How many different balls (really different) does this factory make? Move the holes on the cover around a little, or mix a different color in the inner layer? Be neat to test all the Urethane 3 or 4 piece balls this factory makes against each other….bet results would be so close……
Jim W
6 days agoStarted using these after MGS ball review last April. While mentioned, DSG has more often than not these balls on sale at 2 boxes for $50. – or $25/box. At that rate, the true value by my calcs is $25 x 1..06 or $26.50. per box. That is $2.20 per ball. Given many other brands that rarely go on sale are north of $4/ ball, that price point, in my book, is better than a “good value” compared with others that have been tested – especially given that the Maxfli’s performance IMO is on par with the main brands at least for my swing speed (90-95mph). I played / tried out TM TP5s, Bridgestone Tour B RX and Titleist AVX and found the Maxfli’s to be as good as these other balls..
WAYNE SWISHER
6 days agoI have played MAXFLI GOLF BALLS. They are a very good ball .Like the feel and will playthem when I want something different to play.Spin is good around the greens and the ballplays longoffmyironsas well.. Very good quality and worth a try if someone is looking for a different ball to play. You will like this MAXFLI BALL very much
Daryl
6 days agoFinally found my ball. Thank you Tony!! Avail in yellow. Currently on sale online for $25 ea box. Hot dam!!
Jay
6 days agoHow do these sound off the clubface? I bought some of these a few years ago and hated the sound. It sounded like I was hitting a hard plastic wiffle ball, so I moved on.
Mike Taxter
6 days agoI’ve played Maxfli in the past but not recently. What news I got from this is the factory name. I’m playing the OnCore Elixr now and did not know where they are made. I’d like to see a recap comparison of all the Foremost balls. I do like the OnCore ball. There has to be different specs and performance between each brand.
Joe Perez
6 days agoI picked up 10 dozen when My Golf Spy’s previous testing rated the ball as a pretty good value.. I still haven’t had the chance to try them, but considering that I was able to get them for only $20/dozen with the special My Golf Spy discount code, I probably shouldn’t be overly concerned.
Jim
6 days agoHow about the Top Flite Gamer balls which is also a Dicks brand, any tests on that?
Steve C
6 days agoAnother good informative report – keep them coming. One suggestion; when the text says you found mantle irregularities (or any other problem) it would help if a photo showing them was included. You already show photos of balls cut open so it shouldn’t be any extra work.
Peter Sundell
6 days agoWe request this every time they release a new lab and they have yet to acknowledge our requests or include sample pictures. It shouldn’t be that hard to include some photos.
TxKevin
6 days agoI was VERY hopeful that these would be my go to, high performance, modest cost balls. I was disappointed. First, the matte finish just gets filthy immediately. I also tested each of 2 dozen balls with a CheckGo for balance. Only about 9 were actually balanced. I will say that several (not all) did reflect an axis very close to the CG marked on the ball….though they were overall not balanced. I play the Srixon XV right now. I played the X version of this ball also. I found it to be very hard and short on spin by virtue of not holding greens nearly as well as the Srixon XV which does very well for me… typically less than a few inches to a foot of rollout on most gap to 8 irons. I also found these balls to be a little short on distance…again playing the X version.
Jon Shaver
6 days agoSo far, in the ball testing, correct me if I’ve missed something but it seems like all balls tested have shown concentricity issues as a small percentage of balls. So I have to ask: Is there any chance your method of cutting balls in half induces that problem?
Finally, in your opinion, is it appropriate to consider these ball tests as additions to the comprehensive distance and spin tests that MGS previously published.
Your efforts are of great value to golfers. Thanks for your work.
John Rodney
6 days agoGreat question. On a related basis, has MGS done any testing by hitting balls prior to cutting them open to see if the ones with layer issues performed worse than ones with no layer issues. In other words, that problem looks like it ought to matter but does it?
John Bush
6 days agoAgreed! Quality without performance data seems pointless. What if these quality issues don’t drastically affect performance?
Terry K
6 days agoJohn,
Quality without performance is not useless. Quality is a prelude to performance testing. They found in past performance testing quality skewed the results. They are following a very intelligent and logical progression. Verify the quality before testing performance.
If there are extreme variations within the same golf ball model, how would you state with any validity what the performance testing showed? If the brand of golf balls are not consistent, how would you trust the performance data? One ball did great another did poorly. Which one did you buy? You wouldn’t know.
If there are indeed 11 points of difference in compression in a Maxfli Tour ball, do you think that will have an effect on distance if they happened to test through sheer random chance, all of the low compression ones?
Mike
5 days agoI asked the same question for every cut-the-ball-open review that’s done. What do these extremely minute differences actually mean in terms of performance??? A yard or two difference? 10 yards of difference? It’s all subjective, which is why these articles make nice reading but I don’t base my ball selection on them. I found chrome soft to be consistently the best ball for me despite all of this references found by MGS.
B-run
6 days agoIve been playing this ball for the last year and have not had any issues with consistency. Pair that with the 2 for $50 sale price they run on a regular basis and this is the best performance for the dollar that I have found.
cksurfdude
6 days agoGreat info! I’ve been playing these and liking them – especially when you can grab them on sale 😉
So I feel better now about playing them.
But… I would have liked to see an additional test vis-a-vis the CG Balanced claim…?
(In my own decidedly un-scientific test it appeared most were close to the assignment stamp but none were an exact match.)
Lloyd Davis
6 days agoThis is one of the more useful tests from MGS, which is NOT to imply that others aren’t useful. Ball performance and consistency affects us all, and it’s something that we can “fix” relatively quickly and painlessly. A new $500 driver? I might have to think about that. New balls? I’m in. I saw my almost mater’s golf coach (ladies team) and introduced her to MGS, noting the importance of the ball tests! She was impressed. NOW, since we’re so far along, how about a table reminding us of previous results with each of these. You’re building a database, and none of us can remember all the results. Thanks for all you do!
Chip Millard
6 days agoI bought 2 dozen when Dick’s had them on sale. I use a “Check-Go” on all the balls I buy. Maxfli does place the side stamp on the CG. I prefer yellow balls so I don’t buy these on a regular basis.
BRUCE
6 days agoThey come in yellow too
Gunter Eisenberg
6 days agoTXG did a comparison of this ball with the Pro V1 and the it matched if not exceeded its performance.
Chris Nickel
6 days agoUnless it was done outside with a robot, it’s largely useless information.
Steve
5 days agoThe implied arrogance in that reply is a bit much for me, and, sadly, is starting to become the MyGolfSpy norm. Doesn’t MGS disavow robot tests for the sake of ‘human’ test results, which are supposed to reflect the buyer? MGS tests in a particular way; they test in a particular way. Each offers a specific set of information and should not be treated as the absolute truth for anyone. Please, get over yourselves.
Paulo
5 days agoCouldn’t disagree more.
Adam Flowers
5 days agoI don’t think it’s the best look to denigrate a respected and extremely well-informed company like TXG.
I wholeheartedly agree with the comment above that this type of aggressive elitism is becoming far too common on MGS.
JasonA
4 days agoI’d say statement is half right
Tone does come across as snotty to me as well
Launch parameters can be measured and _usefully compared_ with a human indoor test BUT Quality Testing without a robot is questionable. Flight testing is critical to overall ball performance and 100% needs to be radar based system outdoors (the TXG guys readily agreed with my comment on that).
David Lewis
6 days agoLook forward to QStar Tour analysis. Really appreciate the work.
MyGolfSpy
6 days ago👊
Stevegp
6 days agoThanks again, Tony, for the thorough review. Your efforts are appreciated. Like others, I am interested in the reviews of the Srixon golf balls. While I usually play the Z-Star and Z-Star XV balls, I have a significant interest in the Q-Star Tour. I am curious to see if the level of quality of manufacture extends through a company’s entire range of golf balls. O course, not only Srixon, but the other manufacturers as well.
ChristianR
6 days agoInterested in the Q-Star Tour too. And I agree on check also the mid and lower level balls.
Ivanbuzz
6 days agoSTEVEGP – I’ve also gravitated to the Srixon brand balls and would be interested in test results. In the colder months, I really liked my perceived softer feel of the Q-Star Tour ball. I also love that black alignment line on the back for putting. When I switched back to the Z-Star XV in the warmer months, I could feel the jump off the driver club face though. With a price that’s about 20% lower, Q-Star Tour is good value.
Fozcycle
6 days agoGreat work Tony!
I am a regular user of the Maxfli Tour CG & Tour X CG. As such, I have found very consistent results from the many boxes that I have used. Maxfli remains my ball of choice as a 16 Handicapper.
Adam Flowers
6 days agoGreat job, Tony.
I was just going to purchase some Maxfli Tour’s, so thanks for this timely test! This had probably been asked and answered elsewhere, but is it safe to assume that the 4-piece counterparts of the balls you’ve tested (Maxfli Tour X, ProV1x, etc.) will have similar consistency numbers? I do understand, though, that 4-piece balls have the additional core that can cause increased consistency problems vis-a-vis a 3-piece.
Kleiner
6 days agoI’m enjoying the reports. I was expecting the Q Star Tour today based on a Twitter post. Have you determined the schedule?
Tony Covey
6 days agoQ-Star Tour is coming next week.
mizuno29
6 days agoCANT WAIT FOR THE Q-STAR TOUR AND THE VICE PRO REVIEW!! GREAT JOB AS ALWAYS!! I REALLY APPRICIATE YOUR IN DEPTH REVIEWS OF BALL AND GOLF CLUBS IN GENERAL!
Paulo
6 days agoYellow and white ?
Kevin
6 days agoI’m hoping for the Z-Star (regular or XV). MGS has in the past alluded to the notion that Titleist, Bridgestone, and Srixon are the three most consistent manufacturers. We’ve had Ball Lab entries for the ProV1 and Tour B XS, and even Chrome Soft (rightly so) and TP5. Only Srixon is missing among the flagship balls.