Golf Balls

Ball Lab – Bridgestone Tour B X Golf Ball Review

BY Tony Covey
Feb 10th 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 Bridgestone Tour B X. 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.

The Tour B X is my favorite Bridgestone ball. That’s probably not enough to get you to order a box (nor should it be) so it’s probably worth mentioning that it’s also the ball used by Lexi Thompson and Bryson DeChambeau. While Tiger’s B XS is more popular at retail, the B X gets more play on the PGA TOUR.

All of that said, what might be of interest from a fitting perspective is that the Bridgestone Tour B X is a low-launch, low-spin ball. If you hit it the ball a bit too high or with too much spin, it might be for you. Factor in the higher compression and, if you’re willing to forgo the softer feel of the XS, the B X should also prove to be one of the longest balls on the market.

About the Bridgestone Tour B X Golf Ball

The Bridgestone Tour B X is made in the USA at the company’s factory in Covington, Ga. It’s a three-piece, injection-molded urethane design with a 322-dimple cover. As noted, Bridgestone says the ball offers low launch and low spin. Keep in mind that these types of descriptions are relative to the other balls in a given lineup so it’s perhaps it’s better to say that most will find it lower-launching and -spinning than Bridgestone’s other Tour B offerings.

Bridgestone Tour B X – Compression

The Bridgestone Tour B X clocks in at 98 compression on our gauge. It’s significantly firmer than the Tour B XS which, at 86 compression, is one of the softest Tour balls in our database. A reasonable point of comparison from a feel standpoint is the now prior-gen Pro V1x. That measures just a tick softer (97) in our database. It’s a reasonable point of comparison where feel is concerned, though you can reasonably expect lower launch from the Bridgestone Tour B X.

Bridgestone Tour B X – Diameter and Weight

Bridgestone’s Tour B series, especially the X and XS tend to be relatively problem-free so it’s not the least bit surprising that none of the balls in our sample was over the USGA weight limit (1.62 ounces).

None of the balls measured failed to meet our standard of roundness.

Bridgestone Tour B X

Centeredness and Concentricity

Bridgestone’s Tour B Series features three-piece construction. With most three-piece balls, concentricity issues typically manifest themselves as unevenness in the mantle or cover layers. With that brief explanation out of the way, we flagged six percent of our sample as bad for concentricity issues in the mantle and/or cover layers.

As we start to increase the number of inspected models, I’d venture to say that’s pretty good.

Core Consistency

When cutting the balls, we observed two distinct core color formulations. One of the boxes was a light-pink while the other was more of a neutral putty gray. Bridgestone confirms that when demand was high last season, it imported some mixed core material from its Japanese factory. The pinkish box was a few ticks firmer on average but otherwise, there were no discernable differences between the two.

Cover

Bridgestone’s injection-molded covers are generally blemish-free. While we found no significant issues, we noted a minor defect (a small spot on the seam which wasn’t fully polished) on a single ball.

Bridgestone Tour B X Consistency

In this section, we detail the consistency of the Bridgestone Tour B X golf ball. 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.

Weight Consistency

Relative to the other balls in the Ball Lab database, the weight consistency of the Tour B X falls on the high end of the average range.

Diameter Consistency

Diameter consistency fell in the middle of our Good (above average) range. Only one ball we’ve measured to date (OnCore ELIXR) had tighter consistency for diameter.

Compression Consistency

The Bridgestone Tour B X rates Fair (below average) for compression consistency.

As was the case with our analysis of the Srixon Q-Star Tour, further explanation is needed.

Under our simple compression metric (how similar the average compression of a ball is to the others in the sample), the Bridgestone Tour B X rates as average. However, when we look at the similarities between the three compression points measured on each individual ball (what we call the In Ball Compression Range or IBCR), the Tour B X rates on the low end of the fair range.

Digging deeper into the data, a clear pattern emerges. The average of the IBCR is 3.7 points. That’s among the widest gaps in the Ball Lab database. More specifically, the pole measurement was found to be 3.2 compression points firmer than the average of our two individual seam measurements. For reference, the database average for that same metric is 1.56 compression points.

To put this in simple terms, our sample of Bridgestone Tour B X golf balls was consistently (though not universally) higher compression when measured at the pole than on the seam.

For six percent of our sample, the pole versus seam compression measurement was wide enough that we flagged the balls as bad.

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.

Bridgestone Tour B X – 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 Good

Above the true average for diameter and weight consistency
Clean covers with reasonably minimal layering issues

The Bad

Compression inconsistencies across the three points measured is the singular hard knock against the ball.

True Price

The True Price of the Bridgestone Tour B X is $50.61. That’s a 13-percent increase over the retail price of $44.99.

Ball Lab Top Performers

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

Check out:

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

Jon

3 years ago

This has been my ball for the last two seasons. Needed a distance ball with spin around the greens. This spins almost too much but it’s money the way it reacts to different parts of the club face. just above the sweet spot creates either this towering low spin shot or this piercing forward tumbling ball that rolls at least 40+50 yards. Been also working on my 50 yard low pitch and stop and this ball is super sexy in that department.

About to order some now but they’re currently out. I highly recommend

majorduffer

I started using this ball after reading tests of it versus other golf balls at the low end of the swing speed. I am a senior and average 80mph with my driver.
Tests showed this ball was also long for my swing speed group. The tests were not wrong as this ball is the longest I have hit. The other big bonus is coming into the green with scoring irons results in stopping the ball very quickly.. Its now my tournament ball as at the price point , I try to minimize losing these babies on my course. The rounds I have used it in have been on an average 5 strokes better than my handicap due to more distance and ball checking up on the green. Way to go Bridgestone!

Karl

How do you tell pole vs seam? The ball looks identical all around to me.

Mat

Yes, please explain.

Ryan

If you look closely enough at any ball, you can find the seam.
On premiums balls, the seam zig-zags between interlocking dimples from each side of the shell. Sometimes you can see a slightly wider ridge between the dimples compared to the remainder of the ball, other times you can see that the dimples on either side of the seam are symmetrical in size around the circumference of the ball, whereas there will be other dimples throughout the ball that are varying sizes.
The poles are obviously through the axis of the seam.

Jerry

I’ve been playing this ball for two years. I use a Ping 400 LST and this ball travels 10 yards further off the driver than any other premium ball I’ve used.

Mango

Nice to see my ball of choice reviewed at last. After trialling many different tour balls I switched from Pro V1 due to the slightly lower spin and flight. – the Tour BXS seemed to spin more, especially into wind.

Matt

When can we expect durability testing? I’ve noticed that Bridgestone and Mizuno covers get shredded. TP5 and ProV seem to withstand more wedge shots.

ComeOnSense

Meanwhile, at the USGA Headquarters…..
-” MGS tested Bryson’s ball”
– ” we need to stop the article before is out”
– ” too late, they just did”
– ” then we need to add his ball with the proposed distance control we just released, along with his driver”
-” don’t forget to add his Ivy Cap too, that could be his secret ”
– ” good idea, I need to talk to Puma too”

Scoot24

What?

Jim

Tony do you have any plans to add a durability test? I played some Bridgstones last year and found they were not as durable as The Pro V1s. Something like 9 holes with the Bridgestones and 3 rounds with the Pro V1s!

Paul O'Neil

I bought a few boxes of these when the MGS review came out 2 years ago. The thing that struck me the most when actually playing them on a course, was how straight they flew through the air – in almost a bizarro type way. It’s not the softest or highest spinning ball into greens, but it was LONG & STRAIGHT – I can see why Bryson plays it.

DRMock1

It would be nice to see each ball tested on a comparison graph. You could add each ball to the graph with its test results as you complete each ball. We could easily compare all ball tested on one page and go to each balls test page for in-depth reviews.

Bill

Check out this forum post that TR1PTIK put together, it shows basically what you are asking for. It’s a great reference along with additional discussion.
https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/40540-ball-lab-quick-reference/

Craig

This is a great idea. I’ve read most of the reviews, but having a single chart to compare the true price would be a great resource.

Stevegp

Thank you, Tony, for the great review. As always, I appreciate your efforts to provide this information. I really enjoy and look forward to the golf ball reviews. And , the Bridgestone Tour B X was one I was awaiting.

I also like the idea of a comparison chart, and many thanks to TRIPTIK for his work in this area. While True Price is a helpful tool, what I look for are the percentage of problems and the number of bad balls in the test sample. My reason is that even though cost is a key consideration for many, all of the balls may be at different price points. So, regardless of price, I find that going by the percentage of problems and the number of bad balls are more useful indicators.

Barry Schwartz

As usual, another great article. You mentioned that one ball had a minor defect on the cover (small spot on the seam that wasn’t polished). I think it would be helpful to the audience to show those defects so we can get an appreciation vs. the balls we play every round.

With nearly every ball tested having some “defects”, are balls at the professional level screened out before they are given to the players? I just don’t know that these defects would be significant enough to someone like me (8.5 index).

Bryant

I’ve noticed on more than one ball lab story that the number of dimples displayed in the info graphic does not match the number of dimples stated in the article.. is there a reason for this?

HAC

Tony, how much is the data you are getting on the quality and consistency of the golf balls confirming what you found on the golf ball performance reviews you did a couple of years ago. Are the balls with more difficiencies the same balls that went offline more in the performance reviews or are you finding variances?

Jay S

I love playing the Bridgestone BXS. Honestly my favorite ball to play.

GregWhoLikesGolf

Is it just me, or do all the balls tested so far seem to come out about the same in terms of consistency and even True Value? I remember when the Kirkland balls were tested, people in the comments section seemed to interpret that ball’s inconsistencies as a reason to dismiss it. However, my growing impression is that all the balls MGS is putting through this process have quite similar issues.

Also, I like Bridgestone balls, but I would personally like to see a different naming system. All the B’s and R’s and X’s get muddled for me and I can’t remember which ball is which.

John Bush

I was just thinking the same thing. I’m not sure there is much value in these labs. The statistical analysis is very crude. Id like to take the data set and run some real data science on it.

To me, I don’t care if the ball is flawless. Does flawless buy me anything? Based on these labs I should buy a range ball from pinnacle. But I won’t because I care about performance!

WYBob

Tony- It’s interesting that the compression at the pole was higher than the seam. I wonder if that has something to do with injection-molded urethane/TPU vs. cast urethane balls. Question- if the pole is higher compression, can you get extra distance by teeing the ball so that you strike the pole when driving?

Tony Covey

Compression and ball speed are correlated, so the firmest point on the ball is likely going to be the fastest. With most balls, the differences is typically a compression point or two, so I’d wager it wouldn’t be noticeable. When you start getting into wider spreads, then there’s probably a little something to be gained.

Tony: thanks for the reply. About 15+ years ago there was a rumor regarding the Pro V1 that you could get extra distance if you aligned the seam with the direction you wanted to hit the ball off the tee. I’m not long enough that it would make much a difference, but I understood that several tour pros were aligning the seams to try and get some extra distance. That was the genesis of my question regarding the Tour BX.

Joe Hat

I have been following the Balls Labs since the news about the lack of quality in the ChromeSoft line broke. I think these articles are incredible. I have two questions.

First – since the initial ball labs release, each ball has been compared to the database average on consistency in weight diameter and compression. Hasn’t the average consistency changed over time as more balls are analyzed? Won’t that change the outcome for initial balls reviewed in the ball lab.

Second – Will MYGOLFSPY review ball performance again at some point. While consistency and quality is an important spec (perhaps the most important) what about launch and spin metrics.

Thanks!

Joe – great question. I’m glad you asked.

Yes, since every comparison is to the database average, there is an expectation that the numbers will move a bit.

That said, we didn’t publish anything until we had 30-something balls in the database ranging from what we think will hold up on both extremes (really, really good balls and really, really, REALLY bad balls). We think the foundations of our boundaries are going to hold up. To date, as we’ve added new models, we haven’t seen anything reclassify.

That said, my expectation is that we’ll eventually see balls on the edge of a classification category move. For example, we might see a ball that drops from high average to average or another go from low average to the high end of the poor range, but for the most part, we think rankings will be stable.

That was part of the intent behind loading it up the way we did.

As for performance testing. It’s definitely on the agenda, but we’re still working with some COVID-driven realities. Once we get over that hump, it will happen.

Jarrad S

I agree, Joe, I would love to see some launch and spin metrics included along with the consistency and quality data.

Will Martin

Agree and one other performance metric I would like to see is a measure of dispersion with wedges, 5 irons, and drivers. Probably big costs involved as a robot type of testing device would have to be used and certainly understand the COVID related obstacles. You guys may have done this in the past and if so, my apologies. Love the articles and if they stay just the way they are, that’s fine too.

J Thorpe

I play this ball on PAR 4 & 5 holes because the of the flight characteristics, as noted – long and low. For follow-on shots to the green, on those holes, I can drop down a club to leverage the loft to get a drop and stop configuration result.. As a matter of practice on the tee, I almost always tee the ball with the logo and number on top, for a sighting focal point during the swing. Therefore, your compression point notes make sense to me as it relates to getting consistent results.

However, on PAR 3s, I use the e12., with irons, as the clubhead speed is lower resulting in good results. All this this depends on me, the operator, executing – some days better than others.. I use a launch monitor to track and dial in clubs to distance, adjusting if the deviation of averages warrants..
Thanks for the analysis and interesting way you present the data.

Mike

Interesting response, I definitely see a logic. But if we were playing for money or in some meaningful event, I’d call you out on that, you can’t do that. At our course, you identify the ball you’re playing and you play it. Can’t tailor specific balls for specific holes

bob

Judge Smails just nodded and gave you an approving wink

Rob

Rules say you play the same ball for one hole. There are times that I don’t have two of the same ball in my bag. What kind of macho bs goes on at “your course”?

JZ

It’s within the rules of golf as long as you don’t switch mid-hole, correct? I’d say it’s probably more of a mental thing than gaining an inside advantage, but, unless you’re on the PGA tour, you don’t have to use just one kind of ball. You can’t switch on your approach shot, or putting, but hole by hole is within the rules, I believe.

Jeff

Mike, the “one ball rule” requiring use of a single ball type is no longer a part of the uniform rules of golf. I think it changed in the last 5 years. That rule can be implemented as a Local Rule, but the rules committee would need to make competitors aware of that Local Rule in writing before the start of competition.

Rob W.

You may change balls under any relief Rule or between the play of two holes

Christopher

That’s usually just a Local Rule set up for professional and top amateur tournaments, it’s not in the rule books. If it isn’t a local rule and you’re not switching during the hole, you’re good to go.

When I played it wasn’t uncommon to play with competitors that switched to cheaper balls on their bogey holes or end up with practice balls from the bottom of their bags at the end of the round!

chrisK

That “one ball” rule is a little confusing; not sure everyone knows exactly what’s going on with it. I’ve heard that you had to have the same “type” of ball through the whole round (can change between holes), BUT if you take a ball out of play it has to stay out of play. I honestly don’t know if that’s correct or not nowadays, but i have seen the one ball rule pop up in some individual tournaments i play in. And I generally play the same kind of ball all the time so it’s no big deal to me, but I can see the advantage of changing ball types out if your game is comfortable with it.

Paulo

Finally the ball I use . No surprises here , best kept secret in golf.

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 – Bridgestone Tour B X Golf Ball Review

About the Bridgestone Tour B X Golf Ball

Bridgestone Tour B X – Compression

Bridgestone Tour B X – Diameter and Weight

Bridgestone Tour B X

Centeredness and Concentricity

Core Consistency

Cover

Bridgestone Tour B X Consistency

Weight Consistency

Diameter Consistency

Compression Consistency

True Price

Bridgestone Tour B X – Summary

The Good

The Bad

True Price

Ball Lab Top Performers

Support Unbiased Testing.

Donate to MGS

For You

For You

Golf Shafts

Apr 14, 2024

Testers Wanted: Autoflex Dream 7 Driver Shaft

News

Apr 14, 2024

A Rare Masters ‘L’: Day Asked To Remove Sweater

Drivers

Apr 13, 2024

Testers Wanted: Callaway Ai Smoke Drivers

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

comments

Jon

majorduffer

Karl

Mat

Ryan

Jerry

Mango

Matt

ComeOnSense

Scoot24

Jim

Paul O'Neil

DRMock1

Bill

Craig

Stevegp

Barry Schwartz

Bryant

HAC

Jay S

GregWhoLikesGolf

John Bush

WYBob

Tony Covey

WYBob

Joe Hat

Tony Covey

Jarrad S

Will Martin

J Thorpe

Mike

bob

Rob

JZ

Jeff

Rob W.

Christopher

chrisK

Paulo