Golf Balls

Ball Lab – Titleist Pro V1x

BY Tony Covey
Apr 14th 2021
Read all comments

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

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 2021 Titleist Pro V1x. 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.

Given that we skipped the 2019 Pro V1 in our first round of Ball Lab reports in favor of Left Dash, it only made sense to kick off our tests of new-for-2021 models with the original 0r, depending on your perspective, the other Pro V1x.

About the Titleist Pro V1x

The Titleist Pro V1x is a four-piece, urethane-covered design with 348 dimples. The majority of product sold in the U.S.A. is made at the company’s factory in New Bedford, Mass. However, because of COVID shutdowns and the subsequent high demand, it’s not entirely unheard of to find a box manufactured in Thailand on retail shelves. While all of our samples were made in the U.S.A., cross-factory comparisons of the new Pro V1 found no discernable differences between the factories.

Titleist classifies the Pro V1x as high-launch and high-spin. Keep in mind, this is relative to the rest of Titleist’s premium “Tour” offerings so while greenside spin should be ample, the Pro V1x isn’t likely to be one of the spinniest balls on the market off the driver and irons. Before Left Dash hit the market, the standard “X” was the longest ball in the Titleist lineup and should still more than hold its own off the tee.

Titleist Pro V1x – Compression

On our compression gauge, the 2021 incarnation of the Pro V1x measures 97 on average, the same as the previous model. That positions it as one of the firmer balls on the market though the Left Dash variant typically is a bit firmer still. Of the 50 ball models measured to date for Ball Lab, fewer than 10 qualify as firmer than a Pro V1x.

For reference, it’s about 10 points firmer than the Pro V1, 15 to 20 points firmer than AVX and Tour Speed and about five points softer than Pro V1x Left Dash.

Titleist Pro V1x – Diameter and Weight

It’s exceedingly rare that Titleist lets a ball slip through that doesn’t adhere to USGA rules. With that in mind, it’s not the least bit surprising that 100 percent of the sample was both weight and size conforming.

All of the sample balls also met our standard for roundness—by plenty.

Titleist Pro V1x – Inspection

Centeredness and Concentricity

While we did find multiple balls that were likely slightly off-center (not unusual with four-piece construction), none of the cores was significantly off-center to the degree that performance would likely be impacted. Ball for ball, results were similar to what we found with the 2019 model. That’s pretty much true for all of the metrics we collect.

Core Consistency

Core color was consistent across all three boxes measured and we didn’t find any indications of miscellaneous debris, improper/incomplete mixing, etc.. To ensure color consistency, Titleist blends core materials across multiple batches so it’s rare to find any significant deviation.

Cover

All of the covers in our Pro V1x sample were free from major defects. We did note a higher number of pin marks than we found with the previous model but didn’t find anything to be overly concerned about.

Ball Lab Top Performers

Want to know which balls have performed best in Ball Lab testing so far?

Check out:

Titleist Pro V1x: Consistency

In this section, we detail the consistency of the Titleist Pro V1x. Our consistency metrics provide 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.

The headline here is pretty straightforward. Data collected on our gauges suggests the Titleist Pro V1x remains one of the most consistent balls on the planet. To illustrate the point, as I did with the Noodle Long and Soft review, I’ve included the ball-by-ball consistency chart from the Ball Lab database to give you a better sense of what a really consistent golf ball looks like.

I’ve scaled the charts to show compression variance by +/- 10 points on either side of the average and a compression delta (the range of compression measurements within a single ball) up to eight points. Be sure to let us know if this type of chart is something you’d like to see more often.

Weight Consistency

Relative to the other balls in the Ball Lab database, the weight consistency of the 2021 Titleist Pro V1x is in the Good range.
While the third box measured was a tick heavier than the first two, across the whole of the sample, the Pro V1x is still among the best in the Ball Lab database.

Diameter Consistency

The diameter consistency of the Titleist Pro V1x easily qualifies as Good.
Consistency from box to box was generally excellent.

Compression Consistency

Compression consistency across the sample was again Good.
While the seven-point compression range in the first box is perhaps a little squirrely by Titleist standards, with only a 7.5-compression point difference across the entire sample, the Pro V1x is better than most.
Compression consistency across the three points measured on each ball was nothing short of excellent.

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 retail price and the True Price, the more you should be concerned about the quality of the ball.

Titleist Pro V1x – Summary

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 2021 Titleist Pro V1 is exactly what we’ve come to expect from Titleist. Our data suggests it’s an extremely consistent ball. While we don’t expect all of them to be perfect, the lack of significant defects in our sample should provide plenty of confidence that whatever issues you experience on the course, the ball probably isn’t to blame.

Well above average consistency across all of the metrics we measure in Ball Lab.
Among the highest quality, most consistent balls in the Ball Lab database.

The Bad

Nothing of consequence.

True Price

The True Price of Titleist Pro V1x is $49.99. In the rare case of getting exactly what you pay for, that’s 0% above the retail price.

Looking to save money? Through the end of this week, Titleist Pro V1 and Pro V1x golf balls are on a Buy 3 Get 1 Free Promo.

Support Unbiased Testing.

DID YOU KNOW: If only 1% of MyGolfSpy readers donated $25, we would be able to become completely independent in 12-months. With every donation, you create change.

Would you be willing to help by giving a donation? Every dollar will help. Make a donation to support our independent and expert golf equipment research. A PayPal account is not required in order to donate.

comments

Join The Discussion

Andrew Dustin

1 year ago

Attention to consistency, durability and performance that is why this ball has been the choice for golfers at every skill level.⁣⁣

Robert Dicks

3 years ago

The MGS ball lab is fascinating, and it’s teaching me a lot about golf ball consistency issues. This may not result in a discernible difference in my score, but it does help with the mental confidence. We want to take “ball inconsistency” out of the equation, even when those inconsistencies are somewhat subtle. I like to try different balls for feel purposes, but I always come back to the Pro V1X. And, through my own testing of multiple balls with my slow swing speed, it still goes farther than any other. Quality and consistency count.

Joey C

I use the Vice Pro but I’d be interested in seeing the results from entry level player balls with slower swing speeds. Even some of the cheaper balls would be interesting to see the results of.

Dave Anderson

I purchase a dozen Srixon V Star balls a couple of months ago. In the first sleeve I found a ball with no marking, just all white, no number, no name. Have you seen this in any of the balls tested? Not sure what to think about it.

Andrew

The diameter data showing them all to be within .002″ of one another is impressive. I am an engineer for a company that produces aerospace and defense parts and some of their tolerances are more open than that.

TR1PTIK

The comments here about ball guts guy and float test/check-go “measurements” crack me up.

Tony and the MGS team take the time to speak with industry experts – guys who have been doing this a long time and likely hold an engineering degree – to formulate a plan for Ball Lab. Then, they invest thousands of dollars on the same tools those guys are using and people want to believe the results of some rando with a PVC cutter, a $30 snake oil machine, and an Instagram page… ???

I’m really glad the world isn’t composed only of middling amateur golfers. We’d be extinct already for sure!

Panther

The new ProV1 seems to show wear on wedges or scuff marks pretty easy. Maybe the ability to spin more has the top layer to thin…

Philip

Seconded

cleve00

2 years ago

Thirded

MJ B

As always, great quality report from you guys. Can you please make an upgraded test to the regular 2021 Pro V1 as well. Would be great to compare the 2019 vs. 2021 model, look for any changes apart from the obvious ones “New cover”, “New sight line” and “New dimple pattern”. Is the quality and consistency keeping up with the new 2021 Pro V1x!? :-)

Nico

Very good test as always.
It think it should be good if you update a chart with the gap % between the price and the true price. This to know the chart of the balls with more errors and the ones with less error.

See you, and keep continue. Mygolfspy is truely helping this game.

scott

95% of golfers don’t need to play a $50 a dozen golf ball. .I do play the Prov but I find them .most of the time they look like they on;y been hit a few times.. If you can’t find the fairway with a driver but still want a to play a new ball buy the Top Flite Gammer. Best bang for the buck.

Jason

Thank you—I liked the scatterplot with the median. It was a good visual to demonstrate the consistency.

JasonA

Ditto. I agree with my name sake. Chart is very clear and interesting.

Lou

Why is My Golf Spy avoiding testing golf balls, by having a machine hit them, as they did a couple of years ago? Many of MGS readers are out playing golf now and are making golf ball purchases. But MGS isn’t paying any attention. The golf ball is the one piece of equipment that all readers use and want to see compared. Cutting balls open in a “Ball Lab” satisfies some people but, I submit, not the majority. The majority, by far, wants a results based comparison so they may choose a ball based on how it performs vs. others. What could be more basic than that? C’mon, MGS. Get with it!

Mike Anthony

LOLOLOL!!! Beeejus. Some of these comments crack me up, but this one takes the cake.

If it weren’t for MyGolfSpy calling out Callaway a few years ago on their defective Chrome Soft golf balls, with significant concentricity issues … many Chrome Soft players would be getting a true value of $80 per dozen. Callaway listened and invested $$ tens of millions of dollars into their factories. Other golf balls makers caught on.

There are MANY a websites and YouTube channels that have exactly what you’re looking for. (I think) Many better players really rotate out between 2 golf balls (likely based on sales) and stick with it for they know their game.

At the end of the day, I want to know, (and likely many MGS readers, too) if the balls I’m buying are mostly free of defective balls.

C’mon, Man. Get with it!

No one swings like the machine.

TRIPTIK

Lou, you really are a lost soul aren’t you? What is some robotic ball test supposed to tell you about how you play? At best, an Iron Byron will tell you what you MIGHT be able to expect on an absolutely perfect shot – and that’s assuming you (a human) can even replicate the impact dynamics! I’d much rather know what balls are worth buying via quality metrics, then go test them with my game out on the course. Ball Lab is providing golfers with vital information we’d never have access to otherwise. If you really can’t see that, then I don’t know what to tell you. Ignorance is bliss I guess…

Harry P

Agree with Lou and the 2019 ball test is where MyGolfSpy called out Callaway. Also, the shot area stat from the 2019 test told me what I wanted to know about ball performance consistency.

Peter

The purpose of the machine is to standardize all of the balls performance. It wouldn’t show “feel” but it would make it so that you know what is truly long/straight/spinny. If every ball was hit several times with a driver and 7 iron then you could compare performance. Of course, your real world performance will be different but at least it would give a comparison.
Also, if a ball isn’t considered as “bad” but misbehaves in some way, that would be nice to know.

Andrew Han

What was it that Callaway was saying about Prov1x on the gram?

FrankW

I think you guys should start CMM checking the dimple patterns on these balls too, and make sure they are put in at a uniform depth as well. I play in the wind a lot and want to make sure I am not missing shots because of mis-aligned dimple patterns. P.S. thanks for the tip about the NATURE PURE NIOX headcovers, my spin rate has increased almost 4rpm since purchasing them.

Jobu

When will mygolfspy start disassembling drivers to get true cost?

Greg

Tony, I think the test is fair if the exact same tools are used .This gives us all a fair look and comparison . The only thing that I would like to see is some type of strain gauge applied to the cutter.. The cutter if blunt or not shearing correctly would have more force applied and bias the result.. I am also very interested in the measurement on the top and bottom of the cut for deformation as this would tell us how good the memory of the ball is after cutting. I would suggest 2 measurements one immediately after the cut and another 5 minutes after the cut .
This would be a very extreme test on memory of the ball shape or maybe incorporate it into your compression test and check for roundness with a 5 minute interval. This interval would be about the right time between shots.

Thanks for the good work and thanks to all your followers for without you all we would be still playing and paying for stuff not fit for purpose. This site is keeping them honest ,love your work.

RC

Nice article. Looking forward to the review of the AVX – ever since finding one while looking for my Pro V1x (don’t worry, nobody else was anywhere near), I played it and liked it so much I took advantage of the buy 4 get 1 free deals currently being offered. I was surprised I liked it so much since it is completely different from the V1x, but I guess I’ve been fitted to the wrong ball all of these years!

Check the following link for the test of the latest AVX:
http://mygolfspy.com/titleist-avx-2020/

Kenny B

Maybe Rickie should go back to Titleist??

Ryan

Tony, just dropping in here to say that the new graphs with the consistency measurements are fantastic and should continue to be part of Ball Lab going forward, really helps bring the unseen factors to us visual people.

WYBob

Excellent review of the new Pro V1x. I appreciate the amount of due diligence y’all do in the ball lab which augments the validity of the results. Plus I like the new consistency graphics which provide more in-depth information. Now if you would only test the new Pro V1, TP5, and Z-Star balls in the near term so we have the information near the beginning of the new season. Also, any updates on when y’all may update the “The Best Golf Balls” article? It will be 2 years in a little over a week since you last published that information and a lot of balls have been updated in the interim. Thanks for all you do!

Agree with WYBOB – just bought the new Z-Star and it was manfacutred in Indonesia so very interested in the quality. Also would have been nice to have seen a new Best Golf Balls performance test prior to the Titleist, TM, Callaway and Bridgestone promos expiring.

Hi Tony, have you guys ever conduct the balance of any golf ball thru a gyro spinner? I trust Titleist and I am sure they are perfect but after several tests on my own, I notice that the balance of the ball is not on the stamp where the PROV1x lines up. The weight after a number of rounds I play shows the ball may be heavier on one side. After putting them on the gyro spinner I see the lines up are different..
Your thoughts?.

chrisK

FWIW, i’ve heard tales of guys trying to get the balance of the ball marked so they’ll have optimum trajectories, and then find out after the round that it’s changed. Not sure if Mygolfspy has checked such a thing, but i’ve heard it a lot.

I miss, I miss, I make

Excellent write up as usual. As expected an excellent ball. I have played the X pretty much all the time for years. I do find other balls and will hit them as a “test” and while there are other fine balls when it comes time to buy I buy either out of habit or that I really do not know of a better option for me. I have never found anything “wrong” with any of the Pro V group. I like the X for my wedge and less shots. Ball flight is very penetrating even on high shots with fairway woods.

And that folks, is why their balls are priced at $50 a dozen. I play Snells and love them … disappointed that due to demand, they recently limited their purchases to 2 dozen at a time.

This article nor Snells’ current order limit will switch me to ProV-1s … but I’m even more enticed to order Titleist current 4 for 3 dozen pricing offer.

Ron Buie

I like the new ProV1x. Every time I hit it with my driver it ends up in the fairway!

Will Rowland

Pro V1X is described as high launch. Describe “high launch”! Higher than Wilson Duo Soft, higher than Pro V1? What is high?

Tony Covey

Every comparison like that is to the other balls in given manufacturer’s lineup.

I’d submit it doesn’t much matter how the Pro V1x compares to the DUO Soft. If you’re playing the former, you shouldn’t concern yourself with the latter.

Titleist’s Asia factory is in Thailand, not Taiwan.

Good catch. Fixed the text.

Peter Sundell

I know this is going to get brought up sooner or later, your results are in stark contrast to those that a semi high profile instagram account found for the new Pro V1x. In the majority of his balls which were spun on a check go, off-center cores were found. How is this possible?

I suspect it’s an optical illusion. A PVC cutter works similarly to a log splitter. It’s basically a wedge. When the core material is pliable (like it is with TaylorMade, Callaway, and some others) you get really clean cuts. When it’s brittle (like Titleist’s), you get uneven cuts, chunking. Anything other than a nearly flat surface will absolutely make cores look off center – in some cases WAY off center, so it’s imperative that you spend some time factoring in the quality of the cut.

My broad stroke conclusion from my samples were that balls that looked a bit off-center were actually centered and that balls that looked way off-center were only slightly off-center. Noted, but not flagged as bad.

Basically, we saw what he saw, but we also found that in the majority of cases two things were true 1) cores that appeared off-center were invariably off-center in the direction of the fracture line (where the ball cracked and or split during cutting) and 2) the cleaner the cut, the more centered the core appears. At some point that stops being conincidence.

Short version – it became readily apparent that what I was seeing was likely attributable to the cut itself.

Titleist’s core material splits quite a bit, and anecdotally, I believe the material in the new models is more brittle than the previous model.

For what it’s worth, I have an overseas balls contact who warned me about just this issue when we started. His assertion was that the cut can sometimes lie. His concern was that guys would start grabbing PVC cutters and posting pics without regard for the influence the cut itself was having on perceptions…and so here we are.

My gauge measurements tell me that the new Pro V1x is one of the most consistent balls in the database. Almost invariably, when we do find significant issues inspecting our cutaways, they correlate with things we see in our gauge measurements (out of round balls, and wide compression ranges within the ball itself being the most common).

When Guts Guy can produce a full complement of gauge measurements, I suppose then we’d be on level footing to have a proper conversation.

Here’s why:

If there is a widespread and significant problem with the cores, it’s going to show up on the gauges. It’s why we,. as soon as we realized cutting wasn’t nearly enough, we invested in a proper set of tools.

Fully measuring balls is time-consuming, and not nearly as glamorous as cutting a ball and screaming about how bad it looks, but we also know it’s also the right way to do it.

Simply cutting a ball doesn’t tell you nearly enough, and in some cases, it will flat out lie to you.

BSteve

Thank you Tony for the in-depth explanation of how the measurement equipment and cutting equipment influence the outcome, and how you all use some common sense to evaluate the effects those tools have. I had wondered how other folks were getting different results and getting on social media like their hair was on fire! All I knew was I was playing balls and golf equipment based on MGS’s recommendations and I end up spending less money in the long run, have a better result, and enjoy the game more based on your all’s recommendations!! So, thank you for what you do for us! I appreciate you having the “golfer-centric” approach!

Tony,
Thank you for taking the time to write out a thorough response. I appreciate it.

I remember back when i was a kid in the 80’s i’d take golf balls and put them in my dad’s vice and then just saw right through them to see what they looked like. Of course the wound balls had rubber bands going all over the place, but the Top-Flites and such did cut well that way.

Kevin

I don’t completely disagree with your points, but it appears the IG guy used the same cutter as you did and it sounds as though you shouldn’t be using that type of cutter at all if it is permanently deforming the ball. At that point you can really only look for regrind or other defects and not at concentricity of layers. Some sort of straight through cut with a blade or perhaps hot wire might be better. Golf balls are meant to be compressed and return to form so you would think a sharp enough cut would not permanently deform anything. Testing diameter, weight and compression are relatively easy, but checking 3-5 layers of a ball is not

I think you missed the point. It’s not that the ball is being permanently deformed by the cutter it’s that balls cut differently depending on the pliability of the core material. Some (TaylorMade, Callaway) cut smoothly others (Titleist, Foremost 4-piece balls), will fracture and chunk sometimes significantly. Layers aren’t being shifted, but the result of the cut can fool perceptions.

As I’ve said, we rely on the gauge measurements as we typically find correlations between what I guess you would call atypical gauge readings and balls that have some sort of layer issue (Q-Star Tour was a great example of this). I’ll also add that assuming the cut shows the absolute reality of the ball, a good bit of what people get fired up about being off-center would likely be graded as a minor defect in our system. My interpretations come from insights learned while discussing specific examples with R&D guys – and when I’m not sure, I err on the side of good.

I’ve noted it several times before, a visibly off-center core (unless it’s way off-center) isn’t nearly as problematic as concentricity issues in the outer layers. It’s also true that the severity of the problem also depends on the size of the core, so it’s kind of silly for anyone to toss around millimeter measurements without regard for full context. For example, a Pro V1x or ZStar XV core a millimeter off-center is far less problematic than a larger core ball …TP5, Chrome Soft, etc. that’s equally off-center. It’s all center of gravity stuff…how much weight is being moved (how much a given layer has shifted) and how far away that shift is to the center of the ball. The closer to the perimeter, the larger the likely performance impact.

In the specific case of the Pro V1x, there is absolutely nothing on the gauges that hint at any sort of issue with the ball – it’s legitimately one of the tightest spec balls we’ve measured (though we are going to check some Ball Plant 4 stuff). When you look at balls that haven’t performed well in ball lab, there’s almost always a gauge measurement that suggests something might be off. As I stated in the post, I noted several balls with cores I believed to be off-center, but none so far off-center as to be flagged as bad.

Getting back to the cutter. It’s ok. It gets the job done but like any other tool, you have to be aware of the limitations. I continue to push my industry contacts for a better cutting solution. Incidentally, we looked into the wire cut, but the consensus is it won’t work.

Bobtrumpet

I would think using a band saw with an appropriate holding jig, blade, and feed rate would give a more uniform cut than a PVC pipe cutter.

Daryl

Based on personal testing with check go vs salt water, the check go is not very consistent. Simple test I did: spin 5 balls five times each and mark the line each time. Mine were all over the place so I threw it in the trash.

Desert Hack

Daryl, The way the Check Go works, to my knowledge, is it finds the heavy/light side of a ball by spinning it at high RPM’s (meaning the ball is off center) if I get a ball that is perfectly round, I’d expect there to be lines all over the ball…..as there is no heavy or light side.

Steve S

Agreed. Been doing the salt water spin test for years. NEVER found a bad Titliest, even used ones. Full disclosure I don’t play Titliest unless I find them. Until I start using 1 ball per 18 holes I’ll buy cheaper than Titliest. When(if) I get there I’ll play the V1x…

John

Just wondering whether you floated the balls multiple times and got the exact same result? I have done both and if a ball is well balanced it doesn’t give the same result using either method (which makes sense).

Walter

I’ve used both methods(check Go and saltwater) for testing and found that the 4 piece balls(Pro V1X and Zstar XV) were always worse than the 3 piece Pro V1 and ZStar. Actually the worst batch(12 box) were Pro V1X from about 5 years ago(new box I had in the closet for years), I’d say 9 of the 12 were unbalanced. Even the ZStar XV came out 5 of the 12 were bad(unbalanced). The ZStars were the best, I think I had one that was question mark. That`s my 2 cents, but I`ll keep checking my balls with the saltwater method. I`m waiting to see how the newest ZStar balls pan out in Tony`s tests, you are going to test them aren`t you Tony.

Yes I am familiar with how a check go is supposed to work. If a ball is well balanced it will spin different every time. But if it’s not, the heavy point should spin to the outside every time and your mark line should be about the same even if you spin 2 or 100 times. But using a salt water test I found more then one ball that spun OBVIOUSLY to the same dot every time (indicating poor balance) only to find that the Check Go didn’t pick up on that. I even bought a second one with same results. The physics make sense for it to work but for whatever reason it seems to be very unreliable.

Steve Sheppard

Good article! Thanks. The graph you used was a good visual. Would be interesting to see that with other balls tested.

Sam

Interesting to see the results given Golf Ball Guts has been getting on Instagram. What ball plant did these come out of?

Everyone gets to have an opinion, but we’ve measured over 2000 golf balls for weight, compression, diameter, and general consistency. He’s a guy with a PVC cutter and not a single piece of other ball testing equipment.

I suspect he’s never had a single conversation with anyone inside the golf ball industry, let alone numerous experts. He’s likely never had a single discussion with an expert into how drawing conclusions from cutting alone can be problematic. I’m guessing he’s never talked to anyone about the degree to which uncentered cores or uneven layers matter.

Sadly, his word as being taken as gospel, but the reality is that a $200 PVC cutter doesn’t make you any sort of expert.

We’ll keep doing what we do – and we’ll keep doing it the right way.

He takes the time to flatten out the cut before measuring how off center they are and also uses the same tool you use. Actually, was using it way before others. Maybe he brings some balls where he is buying them from and you guys cut them together!

WBN

Always enjoy the test reports. Keep them coming. A lot of my purchases of golf equipment is influenced by your articles.

Joe

The charts are great. I like them. I haven’t tried the new ProV1x but I did try the left dash and that is more than likely going to be the ball I use. I just don’t know why Titleist thinks that it is for a very small group of people. I only swing 90-95 and definitely get enough spin around the greens for me and is a rocket off the tee.

Randy Burkhalter

Great article as usual. As a weekend warrior I started buying these golf balls as refurbished due to cost. Has anybody ever compared the factory new vs the refurbished to see if cost of them is worth it?
Thanks

golfmate

https://golfsidekick.com/knowledge/recycled-vs-refurbished-vs-new-golf-balls/

Randy

Thanks read the article, and very informative. It gave me a new perspective on how to buy golf balls

Steve Smith

You might try the ProV1 / x practice balls. I get them from Dick’s Sporting Goods stores $29.95. / dozen. The PRACTICE balls have minor cosmetic defects* but performance is the same and PRACTICE or P stamped balls are legal for USGA tournament play.

*someone at Titleist is way pickier than me – they look fine.

Thanks for the reply I will look into those too

Matt

Just switched from Bridgestone Tour B RX and will not be going back. Less side spin off the driver and longer by around 5-7 yards. I thought the Pro V1x would prove to add side spin off my drives and irons. I was very wrong. I wish i would have made the change sooner.

Paul Vicary

Tony
Great article on the Pro V1X. While not for everyone there is a reason why they are a top seller for players demanding excellence .

DaveL

Excellent review Tony and confirms that I have the best ball for me in the bag.

Also – where you stated “…..Of the 50 ball models measured to date for Ball Lab, fewer than 10 qualify as softer than a Pro V1x……” – I believe you meant to say “firmer” instead of “softer”….apologies if I am incorrect.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Driver Titleist TSi3	3-Wood Titleist TSi2 13.5°
5-Wood Titleist TSi2 18°	7-Wood Titleist TSi2 21°
Irons (5-9) PXG 0311 GEN5 T	Wedges Vokey SM9 (46° F, 50° F, 54° D, 60° T)
Putter PXG Blackbird	Ball Titleist Pro V1x Left Dash

Golf Balls

Ball Lab – Titleist Pro V1x

About the Titleist Pro V1x

Titleist Pro V1x – Compression

Titleist Pro V1x – Diameter and Weight

Titleist Pro V1x – Inspection

Centeredness and Concentricity

Core Consistency

Cover

Ball Lab Top Performers

Titleist Pro V1x: Consistency

Weight Consistency

Diameter Consistency

Compression Consistency

True Price

Titleist Pro V1x – Summary

The Bad

True Price

Support Unbiased Testing.

Donate to MGS

For You

For You

Irons

Apr 24, 2024

PXG Irons: Model By Model

Putters

Apr 23, 2024

PING 2024 Putter Line Extension

News

Apr 23, 2024

Nelly Korda Deserves Her Caitlin Clark Moment, So Why Isn’t She Getting It?

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

comments

Joey C

Dave Anderson

Andrew

TR1PTIK

Panther

Philip

cleve00

MJ B

Nico

scott

Jason

JasonA

Lou

Mike Anthony

Philip

TRIPTIK

Harry P

Peter

Andrew Han

FrankW

Jobu

Greg

RC

MJ B

Kenny B

Ryan

WYBob

Harry P

Lou

chrisK

Mike Anthony

Ron Buie

Will Rowland

Ryan

Peter Sundell

BSteve

Peter Sundell

chrisK

Kevin

Bobtrumpet