The Complete Callaway Chrome Soft Golf Balls Reviews
Golf Balls

The Complete Callaway Chrome Soft Golf Balls Reviews

The Complete Callaway Chrome Soft Golf Balls Reviews

The story of the 2020 Callaway Chrome Soft and Chrome Soft X golf balls begins in much the same way as our story on the Callaway Mavrik driver.

2019 was a damned good year for Callaway Golf balls.

The company achieved its highest market share ever – 17% to 25% of all balls sold, depending on whose numbers you like. The popularity of Truvis grew and Callaway’s proprietary Triple Track technology made inroads towards replacing Sharpie lines with actual science.

2019 was a bad year for Callaway Golf balls.

Our ball test revealed that low-compression, i.e., soft, balls are slower and that the notion of soft tour ball might be a fallacy. That was just the beginning. Our #FindItCutIt efforts exposed quality control issues with Callaway balls ranging from inconsistent mixing to grossly off-center cores. The problems we found traced back generations. Golfers, including some Callaway staffers, flooded my inbox with pictures depicting the problems they’d found with their Callaway balls (off-center cores, swirly cores and missing dimples). Said one industry insider as things were blowing up, “Callaway makes good drivers, but they’re poseurs in the golf ball category.”

There’s quite a bit to unpack here so as we move forward with this rundown, there are two things to consider throughout.

A healthy percentage of golfers love the Callaway Chrome Soft. You don’t lay claim to +/-20% of the market with a product consumers hate.

Your affections aside, objectively, Chrome Soft has never been a good golf ball. Nobody making a soft ball has been transparent enough about the performance implications for mid- to high-swing golfers and Callaway’s quality control issues were such that, even if you didn’t notice, it may have cost you some strokes.

A box of Callaway Chrome Soft Golf Balls ready for review

A Fresh Start

With all that’s transpired, Callaway faces some unique challenges as it moves forward with its 2020 golf ball lineup. It needs to keep everything that golfers love about Chrome Soft but it has to do better by its customers who now understand that Callaway’s ball quality wasn’t what it should have been.

“People who play this ball love it, and we’ve changed everything,” says Sean Toulon, EVP of Callaway Golf.

This will likely be news to some of you, and some of you won’t believe it, but whichever side of the Chrome Soft core you happen to be on, here’s your takeaway: Callaway is committed to remaking Chrome Soft into the great golf ball that many already think it is.

Callaway is changing the ball that changed the ball…for the better.

Chrome Soft Theory

As we work through how Callaway seeks to make a fundamentally better product, it makes sense to start with the seldom-discussed theory behind the Chrome Soft design. The history begins with an acknowledgment that just a few years ago, Titleist was kicking everyone’s ass in the ball market. It was a beyond-dominant #1 with Bridgestone, TaylorMade, Srixon, and Callaway all relegated to sub-10% also-ran status, trying to steal a percentage point or two from one of the other guys. Titleist was untouchable.

It was already understood that many golfers, particularly slower swing-speed players, preferred soft feel. If Callaway could differentiate itself from Titleist by offering a low-compression (soft) tour ball, it just might be able to separate itself from the pack, position itself as a clear #2 in the marketplace and eventually make a run at Titleist.

A Chrome Soft Golf Ball up close ready for review

Enter Chrome Soft

Bridgestone would argue that this is exactly what it did when it launched the RX line, but there’s no disputing the fact that Callaway’s take on the soft tour ball is the one that resonated with golfers in a way that no other previous soft offering had.

As is the case with everyone else in the ball biz, Callaway understood that a softer ball was inherently a slower ball, but by applying a more holistic strokes-gained approach to ball design, they believed that whatever distance it sacrificed off the tee could be made up for with longer iron shots. Its thinner cover would give more spin in the short game and ultimately you’d shoot lower scores.

Soft feel + performance. That was the goal. Even if they weren’t aware of the theory driving Chrome Soft design, golfers bought into it to the tune of 20%, positioning Callaway as clear #2 with plenty of distance between it and #3.

The other part of the Chrome Soft story that’s seldom told is that it’s exceedingly difficult to make a low-compression dual-core golf ball. The softer material doesn’t want to stay where you need it to be. It’s perhaps a bit of an oversimplification, but try centering a smoldering marshmallow between two graham crackers. Your core-centering processes need to be perfect, and well,…you know.

2020 Chrome Soft

The Diagram of the construction of a Callaway Chrome Soft X Golf Ball that's ready for review

For 2020, Callaway has not only re-engineered Chrome Soft, but it’s also retooled its Chicopee, MA, manufacturing facility with the stated goal of making a better golf ball. This Chrome Soft’s story isn’t just about taking a step forward in performance; it’s about making a giant leap in quality and consistency.

The redesign of the ball itself follows the industry’s standard pattern. Tweak the formula, make one layer thinner, another thicker, re-balance (definitely re-balance) your equations, and hopefully arrive at something quantifiably better than what you had before.

With Chrome Soft, that’s an especially challenging proposition. “We didn’t want to lose the essence and spirit of the product,” says Toulon. Make it better, but not firmer.

The changes begin with an inner core that’s 34% larger in volume. That contributes to higher launch and lower spin, which will be a larger point of differentiation from Chrome Soft X moving forward.

The graphene-infused outer core helps provide short-game spin, while a new high-speed mantle construction works to increase ball speed throughout the bag.

By introducing new materials and altering the relationship between the three inner layers, Callaway gets what it describes as a “jailbreak” effect for the golf ball. More speed, same soft feel.

A diagram of the construction of a Callaway Chrome Soft Golf ball ready for review

Improved Aerodynamics

The last bit of improvement comes by way of enhancements to Callaway’s TPU hex dimple cover. The updated version is 10% thinner with a new dimple pattern designed to prioritize high trajectory with reduced drag for a longer, more consistent flight.

Nobody disputes that there’s more to ball performance than what happens with the driver but Callaway understands that Chrome Soft’s driver speeds will be scrutinized. The ball needs to be more competitive off the tee. To that end, Callaway says the improvements are good for an extra 5 yards with the driver (based on a 100 MPH clubhead speed). It’s notable that Callaway says 20% of the gain can be attributed to process improvements at the factory. More on that in a bit.

From a fitting perspective, 100 MPH is almost certainly close to the upper limit of Chrome Soft’s viability. Much faster, over-compressing the ball and losing distance because of it, is a legitimate concern. The majority of faster swingers will likely be better off with Chrome Soft X.

The distance review chart of Callaway Chrome Balls

Available Colors/Options

One of the more unbelievable stats I’ve heard lately (and I’ve heard some doozies) is this: Nearly 70% of Callaway ball sales are for something other than a white ball. It’s the reason why the new ball will be available in White, Red/White Truvis, Yellow/Black Truvis, White Triple Track, and Yellow Triple Track.

2020 Chrome Soft X

A box of Callaway Chrome Soft X golf balls ready for Review

While the subtle changes to Chrome Soft’s red box are meant to convey evolution, Chrome Soft X’s new black box speaks to the idea that this ball is entirely different. Shaping differences aside, it conjures memories of TaylorMade’s Lethal. That ball had a stupid name but it was pretty damned good. Callaway hopes that last part will prove true for the new Chrome Soft X as well.

While Chrome Soft X shared many of the same issues as Chrome Soft, perhaps its biggest liability in the market was that it wasn’t different enough from Chrome Soft. In a world of Pro V1x and TP5x and ZStar XV, Chrome Soft X didn’t compete. It has never been what golfers expect an X ball to be. It’s why Toulon says Callaway has under-indexed in sales of Chrome Soft X. That’s industry-speak for we don’t sell as many as we’d like.

The current split in the market place is about 80/20 in favor of the standard ball. Callaway would like to see those numbers shift to 65/35 or maybe even 60/40. For that to happen, Callaway needs an entirely different ball.

A Callaway Chrome Soft X golf ball ready for review

Chrome Soft X (not) on Tour

Brands like it when their tour staff play the same ball you and I can buy at retail. It adds validation, credibility…that sort of thing. Before Left Dash hit the market, about 80% of Titleist staffers were playing one of the two retail flavors of Pro V1 balls. Bridgestone and Srixon both claim that 100% of their guys play the retail model – no secret items on either company’s menu. TaylorMade? A story for another day.

For Callaway, however, the number of staffers playing the retail ball has invariably been closer to 0 than 100%. Phil, Xander, Sergio. Nope, nope, nope.

With the 2020 Chrome Soft X, Callaway hopes to change that. While it’s too soon to say and admittedly calling it a complete guess, Callaway’s Dr. Alan Hocknell estimates that 60% of Callaway’s tour staff will play the retail ball. The remaining 40% should split relatively evenly between higher-spinning and lower-spinning variants. That’s reasonable enough.

The key element in play is that, unlike Chrome Soft where Callaway’s stated goal was to maintain compression, with Chrome Soft X, they’ve deliberately made the ball firmer. It’s firmer enough that having “soft” in the name is probably a misnomer, though Chrome Firm doesn’t have quite the same ring to it.

With higher compression baked into the design, there’s significantly less of a chance that the ball will over-compress at tour speeds. Don’t take that as a suggestion that Callaway has gone full Pinnacle here. As with Chrome Soft, it’s about tweaking materials and the relationship between the core and CSX’s two mantle layers to create a ball that, compression point for compression point, is faster than competitor offerings, but still feels soft-ish.

“At a given compression, we’ll generate more speed than anyone else,” says Hocknell. That’s a particularly bold statement given how past iterations of Chrome Soft X fared against the other X balls in the market.

A diagram showing the construction of the Callaway Chrome Soft X golf balls ready for review

117% More Core

CSX’s newfound speed comes from a significantly larger core. It’s not just bigger; it’s 117% bigger. As you can probably guess, there’s a bit of voodoo in that number. Callaway can more than double its core size because the construction of the 2020 Chrome Soft X has fundamentally changed.

Like the standard Chrome Soft, previous X versions were 4-piece, dual-core designs (a little ball inside a bigger ball with two thin layers around it). The 2020 Chrome Soft X is a 4-piece, dual-mantle design (a big ball with three thin layers around it). It’s a distinction that’s likely lost on most golfers but the change affords Callaway the opportunity to differentiate the performance of its two Chrome Soft offerings significantly more than it has in the past.

The massive (and firmer) core is paired with a soft inner mantle that acts as a dampening layer. It’s how Chrome Soft X retains softer feel despite the higher compression. The firmer outer mantle provides the speed while helping to increase spin around the green.

Callaway puts the actual compression number at 100. That’s appreciably higher than the previous version (it’s closer to the Chrome Soft X Triple Track ball that came out last spring), but Callaway says the ball still feels soft. Most average and even better amateurs likely won’t notice that the ball is firmer.

A chart showing the distance and reviews of Callaway Chrome Soft X golf balls

Redesigned Cover

The cover on the 2020 Chrome Soft X is 22% thinner than on both the previous Chrome Soft X and the new Chrome Soft. Callaway believes covers can be thinned to the point of diminishing returns so it’s not necessarily trying to make the thinnest cover in golf. Its cover was already one of the thinnest but reducing thickness creates an opportunity for more greenside spin. Callaway says you can expect Chrome Soft X to spin more throughout the bag.

Like Chrome Soft, the Chrome Soft X features a new dimple pattern. The dimple count is the same for both balls but the designs are fundamentally different. Visually distinct, X’s cover is optimized for the target golfer. It provides a flatter, though not necessarily lower, flight with the ball reaching its peak trajectory farther downrange.

In robot testing at 120 MPH club speed, Callaway found the new ball to be 7 yards longer. As with CS, a portion of that comes from process improvements. “Part of that is that this ball is ready good,” says Toulon, “but part of it is that the ball it replaced wasn’t.”

Callaway says tour player feedback has been universally positive with several of its staffers commenting on improved wind performance in particular.

It’s too soon to say but Callaway may have created its first legitimate tour-level retail ball in quite some time. If the market approves and the split moves closer to 60/40, you may see some special-edition Truvis models in the future.

For now, the 2020 Chrome Soft X will be available in plain White, Yellow, Yellow/Black Truvis, and White Triple Track.

A  Callaway Chrome Soft X Triple Track golf ball ready for review

Quality Control and Process Improvements

There’s no point in rehashing it more than we have already. Chrome Soft (and previous balls) suffered from quality-control issues. Callaway has owned up and promised to fix it. In addition to buying more machines to paint patterns and lines on balls, it has made a significant investment in technology to improve the quality and consistency of its balls.

It only gets better from here. At least that’s the plan.

The MyGolfSpy staff has tentative plans to visit the ball plant in March. We’ll have more to say then, just as we’ll certainly have more to say after we’ve had a chance to test (and cut) Callaway’s new and improved offerings.

The List

Until then, here’s a brief rundown of some of what’s being implemented at Callaway’s Chicopee ball plant.

  • A new state-of-the-art, four-story-tall mixer has been installed. It’s a crucial piece of equipment that should resolve the swirly core problem and other issues that occur as a result of materials being mixed improperly.
  • A new building-wide environmental control system will ensure that when the weather changes, the ball doesn’t.
  • New Dual-Core manufacturing cells have been spun-up to resolve core-centering issues while improving the consistency of the baking process. Think of them as industrial ovens filled with the most precise muffin tins imaginable. Robotic arms help move things around more efficiently.
  • A collection of new X-ray machines (apparently this one is my fault) has been installed at several places along the production line. Callaway says it will X-ray 100% of the balls at multiple steps in the manufacturing process. The company is leveraging 3D X-ray technology to view the cores across multiple axes. Any balls with off-center cores or other concentricity issues should get plucked out before getting anywhere near a retail box.
  • Improvements to Callaway’s painting and finishing processes will ensure an even coating and uncompromised aerodynamic performance.

A  Callaway Chrome Soft X Truvis Red golf ball ready for review

The Best Ball in Golf?

Two things can be true at once.

Golfers love Chrome Soft. That is not in dispute. It’s also true that Callaway has some work to do if it’s serious about making the best, highest-quality ball in golf.

“We’re not here to finish 2nd,” says Toulon. “If we’re going to be the very best, there are some things we need to fix…and we’re on it.”

Everyone starts somewhere.

Callaway Chrome Soft and Chrome Soft X golf balls will retail for $47.99. Retail availability begins March 12.

For more information, visit Callawaygolf.com.

Correction: The original text of this story suggested that Callaway’s ball share was between 20% and 25%. The story has been updated to include a broader range based on the industry-standard market share numbers.

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 is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site. In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game. Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them. Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Baggs

      4 years ago

      Had to see what MGS had to say! I am a huge skeptic and had considered myself a Titleist ProV1x bigot. I was on the course recently and realized I only had two Prov1x in my bag. Called the pro and asked him to bring me a sleeve. Asked if I had tried the CSX? I said def not (remembering the issues brought to light by MGS). He said I should try them with triple track. He gifted from his stash. I was blown away. Never did I think I would move away from ProV1x. The CSX had soft feel off the putter but still that firmer feel off the driver, and irons. Also has a penetrating ball flight and have hit some of my longest drives with the CSX. Not that its that important but what really sold me is that previously with my ProV1x’s I could replace them after a few wedge shots into the green. The mantle would get shredded. I have played with one CSX through two rounds with similar wedge shots and will still feel comfortable playing it for a 3rd. I was surprised and really never thought I would move away from the Market Leader. I now have 4 dozen, 2 with triple track and 2 plain white. The CSX is pretty impressive. I would recommend players to try.

      Reply

      Baggs

      4 years ago

      I need to say this is the new 2020 CSX. Not previous versions…

      Reply

      Spider Dubiel

      4 years ago

      Personally I think the 2020 VIce Pro Soft is a much better choice for me. Not only that, I think its better than Chrome Soft. Its a better ball period.

      Reply

      Jon

      4 years ago

      Absolutely gutted that the ball I’ve played for since it came out – the Chrome Soft X Truvis (White with Red) is no longer going to be made. Why???

      Leaves me wondering whether to move to another company (you know the one) and getting the balls Truvized up. And, of course, Callaway’s decision comes as I’m down to my last box and no one seems to have any X Truvis anymore.

      Why the heck are they still doing the crappy Yellow with Black and not the wonderful White with Red????

      Reply

      Ken

      4 years ago

      Just got our 2020 chromesofts and tried one out in the hitting cage. Truvis yellow. Paint started coming off almost immediately and then after a few dozen hits it cracked. These won’t be going in the bag. Used to be a huge Callaway golf ball fan (loved the old Warbirds) but we noticed huge inconsistencies in ball quality and characteristics for years before MyGolfSpy outed Callaway ball quality issues. Sad to see nothing has changed… Other than even bigger problems.

      Reply

      Colby Vaughn

      4 years ago

      Played 36 today with the Chrome Soft x. This ball is amazing. My only complaint about it is that I was getting way to much spin on wedge shots. The ball would hit the green and spin almost 10-15 feet back with a couple of them spinning back off the green on front pins. I normally play the TP5 were I was getting spin but it was more like one hop and then stop. Overall I love the ball. Love the feel, love the flight. Definitely switching to this ball. I’ll just work on taking spin off on the wedges.

      Reply

      Mitch

      4 years ago

      I bought box of the new cs 2020 triple track but have to say the vice pro i bought was the better ball easily 15 yards longer off tee and performed excellent at 25 a dozen for 5 dozen and a better ball thats hard to beat

      Reply

      Christopher Foley

      4 years ago

      The Callaway Chrome Soft is the first ball that I liked better than the Pro VI . I have been playing them for 2 to 3 years and have bought 15 dozen . They go longer than the Pro VI by 10 to 20 yard on my drive and check up better around the hole. They putt on the exactly on the line , with the speed that I put them . I Never heard of your alleged manufacturing issues , and I would be willing to bet that most people haven’t either. How else would this ball grow to 20% of the market in its short existence. I will continue to buy them exclusively. I just wish they would make a 3 line soft as I don’t care for the x . The difference between the two balls is noticeable to me. I’m a 10 handicap with a sub 100 mph swing.

      Reply

      Dan Parkinson

      4 years ago

      Why the secrecy in how the various “tour” balls actually compare with one another? I really don’t care how the Chrome Soft compares to itself between 2 different years but I do care how it compares to the Pro V and Pro VX, in fact, that is really all that matters. I could find no useful comparison between the Pro V and Chrome Soft. I think you place too much importance on how the “ball feels.” I don’t care how good it feels if it’s 5-10 yards shorter than the other I’ll go with length every time as I’m sure most every other high-level player will do. Finally, Is there a valid reason my comment does not get accepted?

      Reply

      Mike

      4 years ago

      Well now, kind of explains the weird results out on the course last year. Played a round with about 70 yards difference in driver after losing a ball. I average about 250-260 with the driver. Pulled a Truvis out on the first tee and absolutely murdred it. GPS was 335 yards. Ran through the fairway into the trees. Chipped out for a bogey. Same results for the next 2 holes. Just bombs from a 13 GDP who is 58 years old. Hole 4 the drive was pulled into water. Use another Truvis. Approach came up short. Chipped on. Missed 2 putts. Rest of the day barely got drives over 250. Irons short and fading. Played a couple dozen more CS to finish off what I had and moved to MTB-X.

      Reply

      Steven

      4 years ago

      “The golf ball according to claim 1 wherein the graphene material ranges from 0.6 to 1.5 weight percent of the outer core”

      Reply

      Matt

      4 years ago

      When you say “Left Dash” are you referring to Nike?? If so, you’re referencing a stat for Pro V1 from early 2000’s??

      Reply

      The Greek

      4 years ago

      Never had any issue with Chrome Soft (EVER).
      It goes a mile and I got make it stop with every iron in the bag.

      10 HDCP
      107 MPH

      Reply

      Ranger76

      4 years ago

      Proven in 2019, let the cut tests begin, pick some off the shelf balls to convince me.

      Reply

      Dave

      4 years ago

      Beautiful writeup. Thanks, I enjoyed the read.

      Reply

      Jim Whitton

      4 years ago

      It’s not too late for Callaway to do the right thing and exchange my 3 dozen Chrome Soft X Yellow/Black Travis for their new balls in March.

      Reply

      Dwayne

      4 years ago

      So Callaway says they fixed all of their problems and all we have to do is trust them and spend even more money to get their new, improved product.

      Never. ProV1s, Snell, Srixon Z Star XV, I’m good.

      I got (2) dozen Chrome Softs in the basement .and I honestly don’t know what to do with them. I’d donate them to junior golfers but I don’t want to ruin their spirit.

      Even the local landfill doesn’t deserve these things..

      Reply

      John

      4 years ago

      I love how CS is now the Nickleback of golf balls.

      “Your affections aside, objectively, Chrome Soft has never been a good golf ball.”

      Total biased statement from MGS on the take. I’m a 10 HDCP, been playing CS for years and never has one problem, NOT ONE! With my 107mph driver speed, I routinely drive 275+ (300+ in Scotland) and can stop that ball on a dime or make it do whatever I want. Sorry but sometimes data is BS. Real world matters. I play other balls too (TP5) so I’m not a fanboy I just despise all this negative bandwagon Sh*t from a website that is clearly biased in its coverage.

      Reply

      Dwayne

      4 years ago

      Actually I like Nickelback.

      Gareth

      4 years ago

      LOL 10 HDCP that drives it 275 and can stop the ball on a dime…. dream on pal

      Luis

      4 years ago

      Did you know/read that Callaway visited the “biased” MSG Headquarters and admitted to the QC issues that required the million dollar investment in equipment/redesign you read above? Compared to the other premium golf balls in the market, it was not a good ball and PROVEN in the golf ball test published last year..

      Jeff

      4 years ago

      Have to agree with Gareth statement here.

      Mike in Pittsburgh

      4 years ago

      My recollection is the old balls had two flaws: off center scores and poorly mixed core materials. If I had a few dozen I intended to play, I suggest testing for the off center scores (salt brine or one of those spin balancer dohickies) and just play the good balls. The off center ones would go into my shag bag. Not perfect, but then my golf game isn’t perfect. One thing, watch for discounts on 2019 Chrome Soft balls!!

      Reply

      Thomas

      4 years ago

      Price point was a selling point when the ball first came out. Now, $48 a dozen… LOL. No thank you. Snell IS a better ball for less.

      Reply

      Greg P

      4 years ago

      I agree. I think price was a big attraction and a huge reason for them cracking away at Titleist’s market share. Why in the world would I switch to save a dollar a dozen?

      Reply

      Andrew

      4 years ago

      If you don’t mind- what is the compression of the chrome soft triple track released last spring?

      Reply

      mackdaddy9

      4 years ago

      I swing at right about 100 mph per track man. I played the Bridgestone RX balls for a couple years and tried the early Chrome softs. I lost a couple yards off the tee but picked up about 5 yards with my irons. After your ball test I switched to the Pro V1. I gained a bit with the driver but lost the 5 yards with my irons back. I also was willing to switch because they raised the price to $44. I will be sure to add the Chrome soft to my ball options to start the new season as I choose what ball to play for the year.. Do you think that Callaway has done what it needs to, to resolve their quality control issues.

      Reply

      David

      4 years ago

      Agree with most of the above comments. I still have 2-3 dozen Callaway Chrome Soft golf balls. It’s complete B.S. they won’t offer a refund! There is no question the Snell MTB-X is the BEST ball on the market in my opinion, especially for the money. Apparently it is all about the money at Callaway. Disappointing to say the least. So what they invested $50M to fix the problem…….customers buying the inferior product financed it. I’m done playing their balls. Thank for exposing them!

      Reply

      Mark T.

      4 years ago

      Kirkland had quality control issues with their balls, recalled them and refunded their customers. Why couldn’t Callaway have done the same thing? Profits, that’s why!!

      Putting the profits ahead of their customers isn’t a very good long term decision. At least they’re trying to fix the problem, but should have fessed up to their mistake and at least offer a refund publicly. Stand behind your product – that’s how you build brand loyalty.

      Reply

      Jim

      4 years ago

      Your trying to compare a Warehouse golf ball to a actual Golf company. Costco is discount/warehouse retailer you think they just took the balls back and discarded them! They were sold somewhere or just repackaged in new materials they have losses like that.
      And to compare the number of Kirkland balls that were out on the floors which is minimal because that’s how they do it, compared to all of the golf retail in the world. That would be a great thing for Costco because they have a deal with Callaway so they probably would have been the buyer of the recall balls and then they would profit.

      Be real Kirkland balls are probably not a 24 shift at ball plant once a week.

      Reply

      Ima Fitter

      4 years ago

      So if we have a few boxes of Callaway balls, I wonder if they are good or not. Are they exchanging last years, which may be below standards, or not.

      Reply

      David B

      4 years ago

      Here’s hoping Bridgestone returns to #2

      Reply

      Tim

      4 years ago

      I switched to the Snell MTB – X last year from Callaway. Can’t say I’ve ever played a better ball than the Snell. I’t’s going to be very hard to EVER get me to switch back. Especially with the quality that comes with the Snell price point.

      Reply

      Brandon Medeiros

      4 years ago

      I jumped off the chrome soft bandwagon when they increased price from $39.99 to $44. It always felt like a decent value ball to me, but never worth the jump up to $44. At that price you might as well get the pro-v1’s. I happen to live in New Bedford so I switched over to Snell and couldn’t be happier. With that said I’m very intrigued by Callaway selling these at $47.99 with the reluctance that will likely come. I actually thought it may be time for them to abandon the “chrome soft” name after last years debacle and rename the ball. Seems they are trying but the price tag alone is enough to keep me away or opt for Titleist

      Reply

      Kelly M

      4 years ago

      I don’t follow the intricacies of product manufacturing very closely, but this is very revealing. At least now I understand why I experienced so much variation in performance with the Chrome Soft over the last two years. Some balls I loved, others I went WTH? I even cracked one and that hasn’t happened since 40 years ago playing an ancient Topflite in 35 degree weather as a kid. Switched back to the ProV balls at the end of last year and probably will stay there until knowing the CS is the ball it should be.

      Reply

      Ron Burgundy

      4 years ago

      Im not mad that they made a mistake and admitted it. They’re spending $50 mil to fix it. I’m interested to see what you guys find out after testing and will certainly give it a try.

      Reply

      Art

      4 years ago

      Not mad?!?! GOOD GOD!!! Ball manufacturing difficulties are literally a 100+ year old problem–tackled by some (Titleist, Bridgestone…), ignored by others. This wasn’t, “oops, we had a bad run of balls.” This was a calculated decision to market a ball that wasn’t designed to be as good as others, followed by manufacturing processes that insured the ball would perform as poorly as possible. And the first response to criticism of the problem was angry denial. Why does anyone continue to buy ANYTHING from this company?!?!

      Reply

      David B

      4 years ago

      Agree wholeheartedly. Another cynical corporate decision to maximize profits and hoping the consumer doesn’t notice it’s product is mediocre. Marketing and chrome over quality, as the Big 3 here in Detroit have been proving for decades

      P.J. Evans

      4 years ago

      This is a perfect example of why MyGolfSpy is needed for all of us! Without that story – would they have ever been found out and changed?!?
      Tipping my hat to the entire MGS team for making a difference – $50M difference for Callaway, for sure!!

      Kevin

      4 years ago

      I’ll be waiting for them to be cut open and confirmed to be balanced before I buy them. I really liked the overall performance of the Chrome Soft X, but my game is inconsistent enough without adding a questionable ball into the mix. Were they X-raying balls and sorting them for the pros? If I’m a Callaway staffer there’s no way I’m playing their ball without proof of quality.

      Reply

      Jimmy

      4 years ago

      Of course they were. As alluded to in the article, these company’s will do anything for the pros. If you think Tiger’s SIM is anything like retail, you’re insane.

      I’m a 102-105mph speed driver (3 hdcp) and used chrome Soft for most of last year because I lived the Ryder Cup American flag pattern. I lost about 3-4 yards off the tee vs a Pro V1, which I’ve played since its initial release. I got those years back with the irons and for whatever reason, made more putts with it. I think it’s the pattern more than the ball itself but I got along with them very well.

      While MyGolfSpy bright up some points that are helping all of us get better balls, the distance testing was suspect. Simply averaging 85 & 115mph doesn’t tell the story. Nearly all the distance loss is over 110mph. I’ve banged a bunch of Chrome Softs and Pro V1s down the same fairway and saw nothing like what MyGolfSpy said. TXG couldn’t reproduce it either with Matt’s 125mph swing.

      The 2019 Pro V1 is definitely hotter than the 2017 so I’ve gone back to that recently. It’s a pretty hard ball now – I suspect it’s more like 95 compression now because they don’t want the TaylorMade TP5 guys outdriving their staffers and they want fewer tour guys playing the X.

      The Chrome Soft X sucked. It lacked all the positives of the Chrome Soft but had all the negatives.

      Reply

      Ardbegger

      4 years ago

      I’ll wait for MGS’ testing before I consider dropping any money on these new Callaway balls.

      Reply

      Marty

      4 years ago

      Tony you did an excellent job of explaining the current realities of the Callaway Chrome Soft golf ball as seen through Callaway’s own thick cloud of marketing double-talk. However, I didn’t read of any new metallurgical improvements to the chrome!!?? Given that it apparently is the primary element that makes up the “soft” or that it is at least, if not more important in the whole story as to how a poorly constructed third-rate golf ball could end up with 25% of the market share (did I read that right!?), one would think that Callaway would have given at least SOME attention to improving the chrome. . . maybe they polished it up or something?

      Reply

      Carter Stroup

      4 years ago

      Due to your golf ball test last year, I went away from the Chrome Soft ball. I now play a ProV1 for better consistency. I think Callaway is doing a good thing by improving quality. If it wasn’t for inconsistent quality, I’d still be playing their ball.

      Reply

      seth

      4 years ago

      ” no secret items on either company’s menu. TaylorMade? A story for another day.”

      Tony: Can we expect that story in the near future?

      Reply

      Jerry Tang

      4 years ago

      Where is the recall on the off center balls? Or should the golfer just buy a new $549 driver that was designed with AI and failed USGA testing. With that said where is the recall of the bad golf balls and the failed drivers.?

      Reply

      P.J.

      4 years ago

      They knew the balls were bad, shipped them anyhow – not expecting to get caught. I can’t help but wonder if they also knew their drivers were out of specs and took the same gamble?!?
      Callaway has some work to do to prove their a trustworthy brand again. At the end of the day, I’m sure Callaway exec’s would say they passed Taylormade in sales, so in the end it was worth it…

      Reply

      Joe

      4 years ago

      Every major manufacturer has had drivers fail recent CT testing. Make sure you are up to date before throwing so many daggers

      Reply

      Pete Pellegrino

      4 years ago

      What’s a great Callaway golf ball to play with?⛳️

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

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

    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
    ENTER to WIN 3 DOZEN

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls
    By signing up you agree to receive communications from MyGolfSpy and select partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy You may opt out of email messages/withdraw consent at any time.