Golf Balls

Ball Lab – Costco Kirkland Performance+ Three-Piece

BY Tony Covey
Oct 7th 2020
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 Costco’s Kirkland Signature Performance+. 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.

Costco made a huge splash in the golf ball market in 2016 when it launched its Signature four-piece golf ball. Supply never quite matched demand. A subsequent four-piece offering was pulled due to significant quality issues.

Recently, the giant warehouser has expanded its reach deeper into the golf equipment world. Demand for Kirkland Signature putters and bargain-priced wedge sets is high. Throughout all of it, Costco’s urethane-covered three-piece Performance+ has been a mainstay on Costco store shelves.

In this report, we take a closer look at the Costco Kirkland Performance+ Three-Piece Golf ball and let you know how it stacks up against other golf balls on the market. Finally, we’ll give you the True Price – how much it costs to get a dozen “good” golf balls.

About the Costco Kirkland Performance+

Data collected during our 2019 golf ball test shows the Kirkland Performance+ to be a low-launch, high-spin ball. It’s a three-piece ball with a 338-dimple, injected urethane cover.

The Performance+ is manufactured by Qingdao SM Parker in China. The factory, which was previously operated under the Fantom name, also makes ball for Cut. It also produced the Snell MTB Red.

Costco sells the Performance+ in two- dozen packs for $24.99 which almost certainly qualifies it as the cheapest urethane ball on the market today.

Kirkland Performance+ – Compression

On our gauge, the average compression of the Kirkland Performance+ is 90, effectively the same as the Titleist Pro V1. While that puts it squarely in the “firm feel” range, we should note that, because of its significantly thicker cover, it may feel firmer than other urethane balls with similar compression.

Full-swing launch and spin properties (low and high, respectively) are most similar to Mizuno’s RB Tour and RB Tour X and the Volvik S4. From a fitting perspective, it’s reasonable to describe the Performance+ as a niche offering.

Kirkland Performance+ – Weight and Diameter

All of the balls in our Kirkland Performance+ sample met our standard for roundness.
None of the balls tested exceeded the USGA weight limit of 1.620 ounces.

With an average diameter of nearly 1.685, the Performance+ runs large for a urethane ball. All things being equal, a smaller ball is a longer ball (especially at higher speed), so the comparatively larger average size should reasonably be viewed as a negative.

Kirkland Performance+ – Inspection

Centeredness and Concentricity

The Kirkland Performance+ is a three-piece, larger-core golf ball. With these types of designs, core centeredness issues are not easily identifiable. The majority of problems will manifest as inconsistent thickness in the mantle and cover layers.

In total, we flagged 22 percent of the balls in our Costco Kirkland Performance+ sample as bad. The majority were for significant variation in the mantle layer which, in some cases, was nearly twice as thick on one side of the ball as the other. Several balls displayed what we describe as layer incursion issues. This occurs when a layer is applied before the underlying layer is fully cooled and results in an area of the outer layer intruding into the inner layer.

Finally, we observed minor defects (typically less severe layer concentricity issues) in another 54 percent of the sample.

Core Mixture

Core color consistency was generally excellent throughout the sample. We did note a single ball with small bits of what appeared to be unmixed material in the core.

Cover

While we found no significant cover defects, several balls in the sample were noted for slightly raised dimples with sharp edges. These likely resulted from the balls not exiting the molds cleanly.

General Observations

Unlike the other Tour balls we’ve tested to date, the Performance+’s injected urethane cover is thick and not particularly soft. Typically, it’s a design that would result in reduced greenside spin.

Consistency

In this section, we detail the consistency of the Kirkland Performace+. It’s a measure of how similar the balls in our sample were to one another, relative to all of the models we’ve tested to date.

Weight Consistency

Consistency (of weight) across the Kirkland Performance+ sample set is poor. In fact, it’s the worst of any ball measured to date.
We flagged a ball as bad because its weight was more than three standard deviations from the mean.
On a positive note, none of the balls tested exceeded the USGA weight limit.

Diameter Consistency

Diameter consistency relative to the other balls in our database is fair (below average).
As noted, the Performance+ runs large for a urethane-covered ball.

Compression Consistency

Somewhat surprisingly given the issues with weight and diameter consistency, compression consistency for the Performance+ is in the high-average range.
When we look at the consistency across the three points measured on each ball, the Kirkland Performance+ is also within the average range.

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.

Kirkland Performance+ Summary Report

To learn more about our test process, how we define “bad” balls and our True Price metric, check out our About MyGolfSpy Ball Lab page.

While the consistency of compression for the Kirkland Performance+ can be viewed as a highlight, issues with diameter and weight consistency are cause for concern. The same is true for the construction (notably the thick cover) which doesn’t match the standard for the urethane category.

With 25 percent of the balls in the sample flagged as bad, it’s reasonable to wonder how much actual value there is in a golf ball that shows this many inconsistency and quality issues.

The True Price of Costco Kirkland Performance+ is $16.65 a dozen. While that may sound like a bargain, it represents a 33-percent upcharge over the retail price, making it one of the lowest-quality balls we’ve measured.

Ball Lab Top Performers

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

Check out:

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 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

Vokey WedgeWorks Low Bounce K Grind Wedge

Apr 16, 2024 | 6 Comments

TaylorMade Heads Back to the Future with New BRNR Mini Driver Copper

Apr 5, 2024 | 7 Comments

How to Keep High Scores Off Your Card

Mar 26, 2024 | 2 Comments

How Amateur Golfers Fare on the 17th at TPC Sawgrass

Mar 14, 2024 | 5 Comments

Tony Covey

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

Tony Covey

comments

Join The Discussion

Bill

3 years ago

What if…Jack Nicklaus had a KSP+ ball in his day instead of a MacGregor ball? How many more championships would he have won? The KSP+ is better than most hackers deserve. I find as many PV1’s as Top Flite’s in the tree lines.

ALFONSO

3 years ago

I started to play the Kirkland golf ball approximately 8 months ago and found no difference with Titleist, Taylomade TP5x. In my opinion, all of your findings are excellent information for a professional golfer but for us amateurs, the importance is not to lose distance and response on the greens.. In addition, the cost is so inexpensive that makes attractive to play it.

Doug Clute

3 years ago

All I know is that I have been playing the Kirkland ball consistently for almost two years. I find it to be consistent and very playable. I am 65 with a swing speed in the mid 90s. I have played Titleist, Srixon, Taylor Made and other tour level balls and find them to perform no better. Two years ago my index was around 7.0 and it is a 1.7 today. I have no complaints and would highly recommend it to any golfer. Paying premium ball prices is ridiculous.

Henri8

3 years ago

I am interested in following up on the ball drop commercial of a few years back by Srizon.. Do balls that bounce higher, compared to each other, actually are longer off the tee. I’d like to see the test.
I bounce my balls prior to playing and take the ones that bounce more.

Bill

3 years ago

This was a fair review and some of the comments are very well thought out.
Having played the the Mizuno RB Tour series balls this past summer, I’d agree the Signature 3 piece reacts similarly. It’s an unremarkable ball, but it isn’t a bad ball by any means. When I was a single digit handicap, I would have been less likely to use the Costco ball but for my current game, I find it to be long enough and consistent enough to use as my gamer. That said, I played with a low single digit player this summer that swears by the Signature and got both great accuracy and distance with it.
Solid, 3-piece urethane ball that will save me a lot of money. I’ve used Vice Pro’s, Snell MTB Blacks and Pro V’s as gamers and unless I have the time to get my game back to single digit’s, the Costco Signature will be my pill of choice.

Bob

4 years ago

FYI, the new Kirkland Signature 3-pc is out and being sold as V2. It has a slightly larger core and it looks like the cover might be slightly thinner.

Ron

4 years ago

The Kirkland ball does not seem like a good choice after reading your article. But Costco also sells a Callaway ball that is a 3 pc. Is it any better or is it the same as the Kirkland signature ball?

Chris

3 years ago

That callaway hex soft is no longer on the shelves but is fantastic. If they stock something similar this year snag them up.

Rob

3 years ago

You can still find them on Amazon. Agreed though, awesome golf balls.

Shawn

4 years ago

Just an FYI, Kirkland will be coming out with a new 3 piece ball in the near future.

AWOL

4 years ago

The most alarming thing……….. is that more people have commented about a stupid 3 piece budget ball than the future of the sport.

Pete

4 years ago

AWOL
I’d have to agree with you, I’m really looking forward to The Masters, can’t wait to see it.

Paulo

4 years ago

I think more people can relate to shopping in Costco than playing Augusta

Adam

4 years ago

I think he’s referring more to the last blog about bifurcation or the distance debate

Joe

4 years ago

It would help to publish ball weight data including what the sigma/standard deviation is. If standard deviation is low, then weight of ball to ball is very good and one greater than three sigma is likely an outlier and not a sign of a poor process. If other balls have a higher standard deviation and no balls outside of three sigma, it does not mean they are more consistent without publishing the standard deviation data across ball brands.
TLDR; being outside of three sigma is not awful if your sigma is small to begin with. Publish the data across brands for sigma.
Thanks for pulling data!

Scott

4 years ago

I’ve done many a test on lost ball I found. It looks like price doesn’t matter they all will slice about 140 to 200 yards to the right. it doesn’t matter the cost they all fly to the same spot. . The hook ball very’s allot any where from 50 to 240 yards far left.. So my best guess is most of the balls on the market are bad ( out of round ) or they won’t miss the fairway so much.

Pete

4 years ago

I’m not looking for an argument, but when I read comments like yours, I have to shine some light on your false belief. First of all, there’s no such thing as perfectly round, that’s a fact, if you or anyone else disagrees, then please do some research and let us know what “perfectly round” is, and how it’s measured. The other part of your comment/statement that’s false is that all ball are the same and they all slice/fade or hook/draw the same way and to the same degree, all you have to do is look at some test data to see that the compression, cover materials and hardness as well as dimple diameter, depth and edge angle all affect the spin rate and flight of different ball types..

Mike

4 years ago

I think dude was being sarcastic.

lee_from_ct

3 years ago

Funny. I agree. The trick is, if you normally slice your drives,, look for balls in the woods to the left of the fairway, so your drives will go straight. Look for balls in the woods on the far side of the green, these balls are “flyers” and will work well on holes where you need to clear a water hazard. Etc. Seriously, tho; I do take a sleeve or two of these Costco balls with me on courses which have nasty water hazards; if I lose a Costco ball in the water, I’m only out a buck. When a longer, straighter drive is appropriate, I’ll use a different (“better”) ball. Any time I attempt to really “get on” a Costco ball, they get super-spinny and can go in any direction (usually, the closest out-of-bounds maker). But, depending on the course and the hole, if I play “easy,” they play very nicely

scott

4 years ago

I read the article and when I got to the end, thought that was a masterpiece of double talk, is your second job a congressmen ? Here I’ll help you Is it a good ball for the price or a great ball for it’s price, or you get what you pay for. golf ball. See that wasn’t so hard

EB Golf

4 years ago

I feel like my golf spy’s test of the original 4-piece Kirkland ball and it’s ridiculous over performance has everyone’s expectations for subsequent Kirkland golf balls out of whack. But for the original kirkland my golf spy test, would anyone be surprised that the 3-piece Kirkland is not as good as balls that generally cost 3-4 times as much? I really do not understand why at $1 a ball, everyone insists on comparing the Kirkland 3-piece to Pro V1s, Bridgestone BX, and even Snells. It is a $1 urethane covered ball. The real question should be, how does it compare to similarly priced balls, or even $2 balls. I’m guessing that if compared to those balls it will stack up pretty well. The market for this ball isn’t (or shouldn’t be) guys who would otherwise play a Pro V1, TP5 or Chromesoft. It’s guys who would otherwise play a noodle, velocity, or some other two piece ball. I wish that comparison was done.

For context, I’ have been a casual golfer for years. Consistently shot in the 90s, rarely sniffed the 80s and very occasionally got there. And, relatedly, I lost a fair amount of balls (2-4 per round easily). About 2 years ago, for the first time ever, I decided to consistently play only the Kirkland 3 piece. Why? I had heard that 3 piece balls were better and that urethane was better and for the first time I was aware of, there was an affordable ball that fit that description. I was never going to spend $3-4 per ball for my game and my rate of losing balls. Too expensive.

What I found though, was that playing the Kirkland actually got me to understand the value of playing a ball with better materials, and consistently playing the same ball (rather than whatever I found or was on super sale). My distances became more consistent. I held way more greens (despite what this test said, I’ve found greenside spin to be great with Kirklands and my issue has been too much spin on long irons and hybrids).

Over the last year, I’ve been playing more so my game has improved. I consistently shoot in the 80s now, and most importantly I lose way less golf balls (probably keep same ball in play the whole round every other round or so). It is only recently that I felt I started to outgrow the Kirkland 3-piece. It’s spinniness on long approaches was costing me distance (and perhaps the defects were costing me some accuracy, but I still don’t hit well enough to be sure of that vs my stroke). So, I’ve upgraded to Srixon z-stars. And frankly, my scores have dropped even further (lots more low 80s and more up and downs) since the change. But, the Kirklands were unquestionably the bridge that got me there. I was never going to buy premium balls when I was losing 3-4 per round. In fact, I had a sleeve of Pro V1s back then, and would only play them on certain holes b/c otherwise I was afraid of losing them at $4 each.

While I’ve moved on from the Kirkland, it was a great ball to me when I was in a bracket where premium balls were too expensive for my game. They brought me from playing rocks and found balls, to playing a consistent ball with spin. I really wish people would stop trying to compare it to Pro V1s and focus on how good a ball it is for its price segment (and if it’s not, then fine compare it to a pinnacle and show why pinnacle is better). To me, it feels a little like comparing a Honda Civic to a Tesla Model X. Of course the Civic isn’t a Model X, but it’s a really good car for the price. I feel like the only reason Kirkland 3 piece is so often wrongly put up against Pro V1 etc, is because it’s predecessor 4-piece was a unicorn that far outperformed its pedigree. Please, start comparing the Kirkland 3-piece to its peer balls so that those who are not in the market to spend tour level ball money have valuable comparators.

Paulo

4 years ago

Probably the most sensible thing I’ve read on here in some time. Well
Said

Rusted

4 years ago

Well said. I play the Kirkland ball for those exact reasons. I know that I like you have done already will be changing to a different ball next year. But for the price and quantity it’s in the bag. Again well said!

Toasty

4 years ago

I am a 4 handicap. I have started playing the K-Sig ball just as an experiment to compare it to other premium balls I play, B-XS, TP5, PV1x. Honestly, there are trade offs. The greater spin allows me to keep my mid and long irons in the air longer, as well as my hybrids and fairway woods. Good benefit. I see no loss in distance with these clubs. With the driver in calm and down wind conditions I’m distinctly longer. Only loss is into the wind. Lastly, I seen none of the suggest inconsistencies attributed to concentricity issues.

Ryan

4 years ago

I absolutely agree. I took about 6-7 years off from playing and came back. These have been consistent performers. And now I’m looking to try out some other balls and see how they stack up. Absolutely perfect way of putting this. Thank you!!

Adam

4 years ago

This is kind of weird but, my two little girls came across a cut in half ball and they were just thrilled with the cool colors inside them, especially the tp5 and tp5x. So as I golfed and found balls I would bring them home and cut them in half for them. I literally have cut like 60 different brands/models in half for them. I noticed a lot and I mean a huge portion of all the balls have Uneven layers some more than others and I won’t even talk about the Callaway ones I have cut for them. I guess this begs the question, I can see how off centered cores like Callaway could be a major issue, but balls with 1mm or less of uneven layers that I have seen, does it really affect performance that much? Tony can you answer that?

Pete

4 years ago

I wouldn’t want to steal Tony’s experience and expertise in this area, I’m merely adding my two cents as a person who works in the industry and knows a lot about how balls are made and what type of defect has a
negative effect on the performance of a golf ball, and I can say without a doubt that slight imperfections in or on a golf ball can and will affect the performance of a ball, but with the exception of players outside the top tier professional, and highly skilled golfers, those minor shifts would never be noticed. If you look at some of the major quality defects like those discovered by MGS within the past 2-3 years, yes, you’d see the difference if you could consistently hit a highest quality ball vs. a ball with sinificant differences in the layers of even a two piece golf ball.

Mike

4 years ago

Despite all that negative press for Callaway generated by MGS, for me, I still think for me it combines the best of both worlds…long of the tee and enough spin to hold greens. All this ball cutting stuff, no one will ever be quantify what these discrepancies mean in terms of yardage. Can’t put the ball back together again and test it. Yes, a tour pro may know the difference, but anyone over scratch will not know a damn thing no matter how much of an expert you think you are.

Pete

4 years ago

Mike,
I’d have to agree with you there, it’s just hard having some inside knowledge and reading statements that are completely false and just letting it go, but I’m going to have to and just tune out MGS for a while and occasionally read an article and view someone else’s rake ont things without commenting.

Art

4 years ago

Mike, it would be incredibly simple to quantify internal ball defects and yardage variability. All you need is a bowl of salt water and a golf robot!

Peter

4 years ago

One question and one request
In any of the tests, if a ball has both a cover issue and a layer concentricity issue or an off center core, are they counted twice or just once?
Can we please get more pictures of the balls with issues so we can get a better idea of how bad they can be?

mark franceschi

4 years ago

Tony, great article once again. I’m trying to understand how Kirkland or any manufacturer for that matter can produce a urethane cover golf ball for $12.49 retail. If the major compound that makes premium balls expensive is the urethane cover, and according to your tests, this ball has the thickest cover tested so far, one would conclude it should be the MOST expensive ball not least expensive. What am I not getting? Are we all vastly overpaying for premium balls?

Pete

4 years ago

Hi Tony,
I know for a fact like most regular visitors to your site also know that Mygolfspy has taken the tour of the Titleist Ball Plant lll in New Bedford, MA, I’m not sure if you actually we’re in the group who took the tour, but some of the staff from MGS did in fact take the the tour where ALL PRO VI & PRO VIX that are sold in the US and other parts of the world are made from the raw materials received to the finished balls. In addition to the K-Sig products, from the first generation of 3 & 4 piece balls to the current models you’ve played and tested, can you additionally inform your readers that only two of all Urethane covered golf balls are cast, and not injection molded (RPIM) as that is a major factor in the production cost of the products? Thank you in advance.

Caleb

4 years ago

Which two balls are those? I honestly would have thought it was the other way around, as I know of way more than 2 manufacturers that claim cast urethane.

Tony Gadhvi

4 years ago

Yes Sir thought same as more the urethane more should be the cost so other balls should reduce prices.
Or we will play half a dollar balls so my question is which are the best half a dollar balls
Most people in the world should play lost and found balls bought from caddies /pro shops /online
which are in good condition.
Any thoughts.
Cheers ?

Pete

4 years ago

Caleb,
There are a lot of ball types with a urethane cover, but they’re not all the same, the cover chemistry is different and the molding process is different, most of the urethane covered balls are injection molded, and very few, two, maybe three now are cast urethane. The cast urethane is a more expensive process with most cover formulations protected by patents or trademark, and the raw materials are more expensive. The only companies that I know have a cast urethane cover are Titleist and TaylorMade. One or more of the other companies with a classy urethane cover are outsourced to one company who makes the balls for people like Snell who simply pay for someone to make the balls, and then Snell sells and distributed the balls.

Jon

4 years ago

Great discussion. The simplest answer is to how Costco can develop a ball at this price point is it’s vertical margin. No Roger Dunn, or PGA Superstore, Or Dick’s Sporting Good’s in the way. Also, no marketing spend. Titliest spends a lot to inform us of how great their product is and just as much to make sure the worlds best golfers are using the product. Costco doesn’t have that spend. And Costco requires margins much lower than your typical retailer (10-20% vs 50-60%) due to the offsetting revenue from membership dues. Not sure if it’s still the case, but Costco’s Kirkland brand used to target making products that were at least 10% better than its competitive set, at a lower price.

Pete

4 years ago

Costco never made anything, what you saw in quality balls were made from the extra cores manufactured by real golf ball manufacturers and Costco had the extras made with their name on them, that’s why they were sued and served with a cease and desist order for patent infringement.

Johnny

4 years ago

I used different ball brands and recently my handicap went down using Kirkland used balls bought in ebay, using cheap balls give me confidence to hit and no worries to lose them, playing expensive ball delays the game by keep on looking over 5 minutes, in conclusion Kirkland balls improve my handicap !

Pete

4 years ago

Your comment is basically the reverse of the majority of logical players, most of us would say that when playing with the best perming products, your focus should be 100% on your swing, club selection, and the shot you’re trying to hit while never thinking or considering that if you flush the shot you’re attempting to make, the performance of the ball will be consistent every time.

Based on the test data, and obvious possible defects shown in this article that clearly prove the manufacturing defects, and inconsistent manufacturing process used to make the lower, or lowest cost ball available would cause me to think and feel like, even if I hit the perfect shot exactly as I planned, the shot I wanted to hit, and needed to hit to carry the hazard, or laying up to the yardage that will allow you to hit the second or third shot with the wedge or iron I’m most confident with could end in failure based solely on the performance/quality of the golf ball. That’s my feeling anyway.

Adam

4 years ago

Hi Pete, I can see where Johnny’s logic is when it comes to what ball he plays. Some of us clutter our minds too much with over analyzing the shot, when we would have just been better off walking up to the ball and hitting it. If playing a cheap balls gives him that little bit of extra freedom to swing naturally, then I am all for it. You have to remember most people are high handicaps and flushing a cheap ball over a tour ball they probably wouldn’t notice the difference. But what they will notice is how much it costs to replace the balls they shank.
Like I mentioned I am not a fan of this ball and my handicap is low enough where I can tell the difference between balls that check up for me, or have consistent flights. But that’s only because my swing is consistent Any who……to each there own and just play the game you want to play.

Crostoam

4 years ago

When will you all test the Srixon Z-star / Z-star XV? Would also love to see the Bridgestone Tour B X.

Thanks again!

Greg Tavernit

4 years ago

Very impressed with all of your data Tony! I switched to the Kirkland ball a few months ago after hitting Chrome Soft the last two years. You are dead on with the low trajectory. But, my approach shots always check and some spin depending on the greens. Anyway, for $25 a dozen it passes all my inspections.

mizuno 29

4 years ago

This reminds me of the old balata ball, spins so much you loose yardage off the tee box, into a green with a full wedge……………this ball spins so much its stupid!!!

Paulo

4 years ago

I can’t ever remember being happier on a golf course than making the balata balls spin back like magic. Yes it’s spun back into the water hazard but whilst it sunk I’d have a smile on my face

Pete

4 years ago

No doubt everyone feels like you do, lol, there are very few things that happen on the golf course during a round with friends, and, or, competitors that get you as jacked as hitting a short iron or wedge into a green and after either one or to hops, the ball bites and spins back like you’re pulling it with a string! It’s awesome to watch the pros do it, and even more awesome when you can do it yourself and and catch one of your frieyor opponents jaw drop at what they just saw, and you can hear the envy in their voice along with excitement as they ask “How the hell did you do that?” Ahhhhh but the days of the V shaped grooves and balls with a very low compression and very soft urethane cover like the first 4 or 5 generations of the PRO VI, or better yet, the PRO VI Diamond, that ball could make a decent wedge player look like Tiger or Phil, but it only lasted two years, one short model’s lifespan due to the damage to the cover after a hard V groove Vokey wedge into a green, the soft cover sheared to the point where you were afraid to hit it again because if how those 3-5 cuts would affect the ball flight on the next shot….. But the loss was so worth that feeling ??

Aart

4 years ago

Innovative testing. Hope the lists will grow long.
Could you include Titleist Tour Soft and Tour Speed in the line up.
And, indeed, Pinnacle Soft and Pinnacle Rush are popular here among mid-high handicap golfers, so include them too

Ol'pal Gary

4 years ago

Call me a cheap bastard but i get my longer & straighter drives with DDH balls.
I do appreciate what you guys do for hackers out here.
Ol’Pal

Shepard Smith

4 years ago

Tony. Have you found any high launch, low spin,, firm urethane balls in the $30 a dozen range with decent greenside spin Big thanks.

Dan

4 years ago

I used to play Kirkland balls for the price… both 3-piece and 4-piece (when available). After switching to Srixon Q-Star Tour 3-piece, I’ve found much greater consistency in distance and better “feel” around the green. I’ve also discovered that getting “recycled mint” Q-Star Tour balls has really been a negative versus the new ones and are less than 1/2 the price.

Joe Domill

4 years ago

great job testing the costco ball. I perfer to play american balls and callaway make their balls in maas.. You had tested them and you guys did agreat job doing so, Keep up the good work

Pete

4 years ago

Yes, MGS did a great job discovering how bad the concentricity of Callway’s premium ball, also, keep in mind, Callaway makes Chrome Soft and possibly one other model in Massachusetts, all others are made in China…
If you don’t believe me, do some research and see for yourself.

scott

4 years ago

Mr. America parks his Honda why’ll talking on his Apple smartphone ( China ) bending over to put on a pair of Footjoy made in China golf shoes. Then counts the 14 clubs made in China BUT assembled in the good old USA.. To stay covered he put’s on his Nike shirt shorts and socks all made in in China but the belt was hand crafted in Taiwan ( the good China ) but your ball is made in america . God Bless America

Pete

4 years ago

Scott,
You can imagine all you want, there’s only but there’s more fiction than fact in your comment and the only reason is that there’s no alternative..
I prefer to be Captain America anytime as opposed to a person who gladly supports the communist country who hates and would destroy America in a heartbeat if they could.

Funkaholic

3 years ago

Hondas are made in Ohio.

Andrew Han

4 years ago

Thanks. ProV1x and MTBx for me. Although Kirkland is half the cost of MTBX, can’t argue the quality.

When are you going to release ProVIx? I know you are a business, but maybe two reports a week?

Danny Gibson

4 years ago

Would love to see how the left dash prov1X goes up against others.

Mike

4 years ago

Tony – You mention here that a number of balls were underweight and that an underweight ball does not go as far. With your experience and knowledge studying balls I have a question slightly off topic. IF (caps intentional) you were to support restricting the distance the ball goes would you consider reducing the weight of the ball as a viable option?

Daryl

4 years ago

A year ago I did the epsom salt test on 24 srixon soft feels (2 piece) and 24 srixon z stars. The soft feels were much more consistent which shocked me. I still gamed the Z-stars but super curious how MGS lab would come out.

Patrick

4 years ago

Please test Srixon Z Start and Z Star XV. Appreciate the work!

Mike

4 years ago

I have stated several times that I believe the quality and consistency of tour quality urethane balls out perform my ability as a 6 handicap golfer. This may sound like I am a right wing, flag waving patriot but politics and loyalty are important to me even though some who know me regard me as a leftist commie. I will always buy American whenever I can. So these balls and several other brands are not headed to my bag.. I have hit Snells and Costcos as I have found several of each and they are good enough. I am glad the country of manufacture is included at the beginning of the write up as it saves me from having to read the rest of the story. I support American business and workers as much as I can. So if my ProV1x’s are not as cost effective as some other balls that they are 100% American made for balls sold in the US is a deciding factor for me. I would hope that more would consider that. “Buy American” is not a partisan political view. It is about supporting my fellow American workers

Jon

4 years ago

I see your point, but Chinese people are people, too. They need to work and support their families just as people on this block of land do. Borders are only borders because the elites and the politicians say they are. We’re all human beings, and should look at each other as such, not as members of a particular political region called a “country”.
As a side note, do all the raw materials in a ProV1 come from this geographic area, or are they “imported”?

Bob

4 years ago

We are all people on this planet but we normally care for our family before we care for others. That is the same concept as caring for Americans before we care for the Chinese in China. I agree buy American as much as possible.

Pete

4 years ago

Many of the materials used to make ALL Titleist & Pinnacle balls come from and are sold by American companies with American workers and tax payers.
I agree with you that Chinese are people too, with children and families to support, feed, clothe, and educate, but until China begins paying for, or providing at no cost, the roads & bridges we drive on, or supplies at no cost the trains, planes, automobiles, healthcare needs, food, clothing, and education for American families, as well as erasing the trade deficit President Trump has begun to address, then I’ll continue to buy American made products, or at least products sold and/or distributed by American companies run by American people with American workers whenever possible. Remember, buy American, the job you save may be your own. I’d also like to add that I’m not a member of any union or any other organization that restricts or friend on imported products, it’s simply a choice I’ve made over the past 15 years while watching China devestate many economies around the world with their slave labor pay rates and their horrific record in human rights including their own citizens!

Sean

4 years ago

Mike – Only Taylormade and Callaway produce golf balls in the USA.

Tony Covey

4 years ago

…and Bridgestone.

golfman12020

4 years ago

Wrong, Titleist makes most products in America, the V1 & V1X made in Thailand are for the Asian & European markets strictly for shipping costs.

Mike

4 years ago

The Titlist ball plants are in New Bedord Mass. All Titleist balls sold in the US are produced in those plants. AS far as I know Callaway also uses US plants. The TP5 and TP5x both list parts of the ball from overseas and assembled in the US. My comment was about the Kirkland ball in this test which is listed as made in China. By no means was I implying that Titleist is the only ball produced in the US.

John

4 years ago

Buy USA made as much as possible! End of story.

G

4 years ago

Not all ProV1/X are made in the US

Pete

4 years ago

The only PRO VI & PRO VIX that are made in a plant owned by Titleist VIX are sold in Asia and parts of Europe,

Pete

4 years ago

Bad news for you Mike, the Snell MTB & MTBX aro NOT made in America, every ball is made outside America and is then shipped to a warehouse/distribution center here in Massachusetts and sold online.

Daryl

4 years ago

Fantastic test as always! Please, please, please test a domestic made FIRM 2 piece surlyn ball like the Pinnacle Rush ($1.33 in yellow). Simple construction designed and built completely by Titleist. Seems hard to screw up on the manufacturing side… Yes I understand the performance difference (not as big as people think). I also understand the price difference over entire season. 12 handicap but I play a lot and have bad days :)

CHUCK

4 years ago

I NEVER REALIZED THERE WE SO MANY PROS OUT THERE NOT ON TOUR .SAME GUYS PROABLY BUY $400. SHAFTS BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY”RE BETTER THAN MR. BARGAIN HUNTER. PLAY A ROUND WITH NITRO BALLS & CLUBS-BET YOUR SCORE IS SAME.!

Keith

4 years ago

Your keyboard appears to be broken…

JimmyZ

4 years ago

Is the proper comparison a $40+ tour ball or a $24 Surlyn Ball? This could be more consistent than a $24 surlyn ball at half the price.

TR1PTIK

4 years ago

I’d say it’s a fair comparison. The marketing on Costco’s website literally reads:

“Introducing the Kirkland Signature Performance Plus three-piece urethane cover golf ball, a high performance ball suitable for recreational and competitive play.”

I don’t know of any golfer that would make the argument that surlyn balls are “premium”.

TR1PTIK

4 years ago

My bad… “high performance”…

https://www.costco.com/kirkland-signature-3-piece-urethane-cover-golf-ball%2C-2-dozen.product.100406428.html

Mike Cahn

4 years ago

Thanks for great testing on all the products you do. Bought them when they first came out and they were a pretty good ball. This newer batch are not so good. They do not have the consistency in flight .the older ones had.

Peter

4 years ago

Snell all the way!! Best bang for the buck$!

Shane

4 years ago

I understand that the construction consistency is low in comparison to balls that aim to be in the “players” golfball but I don’t think that is Costco’s target. These balls are meant for a 15+ handicap that is never going to spend more than $30 a dozen on golf balls but still wants the spin that only urethane can provide. Sure, this cover may be thicker than other urethane balls but I am sure it provides significantly more spin than a surlyn cover.

Compare this ball performance wise to other balls in the price range and I am guessing that it is head and shoulders better. As you continue to add balls to your testing, you need to chart these in different categories such as price and construction. Kirkland may make the worst urethane ball but might make the best ball under $30. People want to know the best performance in their price range as that is how golf ball purchasers are divided, price range first and then the one that best fits your game.

I would also love to see a secondary testing method to these balls that look at performance as well and match them up with their true value. spin, lauch angle and ball speed would be very good numbers to know next to the true value pricing.

Great work as always

Sébastien

4 years ago

I second your point

steven

4 years ago

I’m thankful for the testing that you do. What it does is narrow down the choices for my game. I used to slice the ball, hence lose a lot of balls. Consequently I’d use whatever. I’ve pretty much eliminated the slice and bad shots due to lessons and practice. So now I play a more of a premium ball and these evaluations have helped me. Make the best choice for my game. Also as I age, the swing gets slower and flexibility becomes an issue, I will reevaluate what ball I use.

saveva

4 years ago

Over Retail
2020 Callaway Chrome Soft – 24.6%
2019 Titleist Pro V1 – 2.9%
2020 Bridgestone Tour B XS – 12.5%
Taylormade TP5 – 12.5%
Snell MTB-X – 2.8%
Costco Kirkland Performance+ – 33.3%

Paulo

4 years ago

%’s is an inappropriate factor to use when the base prices are so far out . I wouldn’t personally use them , but whichever way you look at it Costco is still the cheaper option overall . For 99.99999% of players in the winter it’s plenty good enough too

Bill M

4 years ago

Tried a few that I found, knew immediately that it was a not a good ball for me. Oddly enough, I actually really like the gold box, refunded batch of balls from costco. They were not perfect, but I like the feel, seems to get good distance with it, good stopping power, etc. I had some cut very quickly, others go a full round with no issues. Two of my best scores this year are with the gold box ball ( second best round was a prov1x). I hope Costco finds a good supplier and design model to do another “tour” model run akin to the black and gold box models. Come on Nassua, make it happen!

Rob W.

4 years ago

The review is spot on for my on course experience. I bought 2 dozen last year and put them in play for 3 rounds in pretty soft spring conditions. I drove it a mile, but quickly found myself fixing ball marks on the green, but putting from fringes. After watchin a full SW fly over the pin and bounce off the surface, I grabbed a TP5 I found and hit a 2nd shot. The ball marks were a foot apart, but the TP5 checked up. That was all the anecdotal evidence I needed. I gave the 18 or so balls I had left to my teenagers and went back to playing Bridgestone.

Mike Z

4 years ago

I had a similar experience. Crushed the ball off the tee, mostly. Sometimes, it would seem like i got every piece of a drive and I would find it had only gone about 275 ( I live at 6500 feet above sea level and swing at around 110 MPH.) Other times, same feeling but it was out in the 330’s. Same, center-face contact, same swing speed, just some balls felt lifeless. I hit the ball pretty high, so full wedge shots into the green stopped ok but one shot in particular I recall, on a nemesis par-3, I said, “that was the best shot I’ve ever hit here,with an 8-iron, should have a birdie putt.” Sure enough, the ball mark was a yard past the flag but the ball had rolled 30 feel and off the green. Granted, it’s a tough green but the ball should have held. Could be worse for a dollar a ball, and if diapers are messing with your golf budget, they’re fine. But if you’re trying to maintain or improve your handicap, don’t look at them. Just Got some Srixon z-star xv’s on the cheap from ebay, that’s how I save money and get performance balls.. Just my 2+ cents

Adam W

4 years ago

I think this ball hits the mark for what is intended. I personally didn’t like them but if I was running low on balls or wanted a winter ball in the PNW it’s not a bad choice at that price. Even though there are some quality issues I would assume it will still perform better than most non urethane covered balls. It’s a ball meant for the masses and at that price I think they accomplished that. Please….get of the horrible logo though. The ball would look much better with a big “k” like a Bridgestone ball and not make it look cheap.

TxKevin

4 years ago

I tested about 6 dozen of these balls with a Check Go for balance consistency. I found that a full 60% of them were not balanced. By comparison I find that balls like the TP5 and Pro V1 are balanced better than 20% of the time. I continue to look for that 3G ball…Great feel, great distance, great value. So far, Its not the Kirkland and its not the Maxfli Tour. My favorite ball right now is the Srixon ZStar XV which is only slightly less expensive ($5/dz) than the tier 1’s …ProV1, TP5/X, Bridgestone BX/S.

Joe Conroy

4 years ago

Biased. We know your site’s predisposition toward pricey balls as well as Snell balls, so this review is no surprise. That is especially obvious from noting the only category you used to ding the Costco balls was one that was not numerically defined. Instead you had the raters who knew the balls were Costco, use their own interpretations to define balls as “significantly” not concentric.

Tony Covey

4 years ago

Hey Joe. Every ball gets treated the same here, though your response suggests you may have some bias. Projection and whatnot…

I’m responsible for ball lab from end to end…procurement, measurement…hell, I even worked with industry experts to spec and buy our tools as well as to better understand the consensus on minor vs. major defects.

But sure…question my credibility and the credibility fo the process.

Did you miss the part where I flagged a ball for being more than 3 standard deviations from the mean for weight. That’s as numeric as it gets.

Also worth noting that consistency of weight and diameter (both entirely driven by numbers) were poor and fair (below average) respectively.

I’m fine with anyone who wants to argue the value proposition. It’s inarguably an inexpensive ball. It’s also true that, from a quality and consistency standpoint, it falls well short of the market leaders.

Kyle

4 years ago

Joe…dude, did you even read the report? We get that you like a “bargain” but the data says it’s a bad ball. Data. Not opinion. Just happily play your $12 a dozen rocks, knowing full well they can’t compare to OEM offerings. They don’t have to. Apples and oranges mate.

Stephen Nichols

4 years ago

Joe, cognitive bias is a real thing, man. Look it up.

Wayne

4 years ago

Hey Joe… If you wanna play Coctco balls go ahead. You can also play your Taylormade bubble-shafted Burner driver that you bought on Ebay for $10, but if you are any kinda fan or viewer of MyGolfSpy you’d know better than to question the integrity of their tests!

J, Bristol

4 years ago

Hi Tony, thanks for another interesting Ball Lab article. As a result of the MGS’ 2019 Ball Test I’ve been testing both the KSig 3-Piece & Inesis Tour 900 balls. this summer, as low cost urethane options (I’m not rich enough or good enough to want to lose more expensive balls). I find little difference in the tee-to-green performance of these balls but I find I prefer the greenside performance & firmer feel off the putter of the KSig 3-Piece. and I have a couple of questions.
1. Will you be reviewing the Inesis Tour 900 ball in Ball Lab?
2. What other ball is similar to these balls in terms of feel and actual performance (performance-wise I’m referring back to the 2019 Ball test & obviously not Ball Lab) that I could test as another option?

Tony Covey

4 years ago

Looking into testing some Inesis. DTC and house brand models take more time to the source because we like to spread out orders over time, and when possible, between vendors. That’s especially true now that we have enough models in our database to understand the range of quality within the market.

I mentioned it in the report, I believe. The Mizuno RB Tour Series and the Volvik S4 have similar low launch/low spin characteristics.

J, Bristol

4 years ago

Thanks again Tony. I’m playing Inesis & KSig due to price and for the benefits of urethane covers. Your response is great as it raises the question that while the price might be right (Inesis £23/doz; KSig £13/doz in the UK) is the ball right for me.? As the KSig is stated as ‘low launch / high spin’ & my low launch with my driver & irons are a running joke among my playing partners, especially my infrequent ‘worm-burners’ that run forever. I’ll have a look at the Mizuno & Volvik balls plus try some other high launch / high spins balls at similar compression. I take it that with a 98 mph drive swing speed it would be best to steer clear of ‘x’ versions of balls?

Peter

4 years ago

I personally play these balls because the price is right based how many balls I lose. Once my game comes around to where I’m not losing so many balls, I plan on starting to play something nicer and consistent.

Rocky

4 years ago

I am sure this has probably mentioned somewhere but is there a way to find out if a ball is defective/unbalanced without cutting it open? Thanks Tony and Mygolfspy for all you are doing for the golf consumers.

Berniez40

4 years ago

I really like the review model and the scientific approach it takes.. It continues to shoot holes in all the marketing B.S. that’s out there. I have hit many of the Costco 3-piecers that I find on the course, and remain completely underwhelmed every time I do so. They remind me of the Rock Flites of old before Dick’s bought the name, and found a consistent manufacturer.
If Costco wants to be taken seriously in the ball market, they need to do something simialr. Even if the balls ended up costing $19.99 a dozen, they would be an absolute bargain—-especially if newer manufacturing ended up giving us a 3 piece urethane coverd ball of consistent quality.
Between the putters, the wedges, and the gloves, they have already cleaved out a nice little niche for themselves.. A truly good ball, one that could actually give the TaylorMades and Titleists a run for their money at less than half the price would be huge. At that point, Costco is really in the game. and maybe, just maybe, with such huge price reductions, and quality product available to the masses, we could turn the golf industry back around. Sadly, though in recovery mode thanks to Covid (how ironic) the industry is still licking it’s wounds after the great recession wiped out the traditional retail and business models in the golf industry.With the right product at the right price Costco could become an integral part of the new model for the industry.

Pete

4 years ago

Bermiez40
What you’ve seen in the past, and currently with things like the glove Cotco sell ms will never happen with golf balls, when they tried to make a ball as good as Titleist and Taylormade, they were sued and forced to stop due to patent infringement. The other part of this you fail to mention is the quality and consistancy of the raw materials used to make golf balls as well as the tooling, and manufacturing equipment balls are made with. Labor costs are a small part of it, like most products in the world in any industry, you get what you pay for, and the difference between $19.99 and $49.99 isn’t all in Marketing and huge profits, if you knew what it costs to run a clean production facility with temperature and humidity controlled space, and the equipment costs, tooling, R&D, and a group desiccated to evaluating all competitors golf balls, as well as a legal department to not only keep others from infringing on your parents, but also prevent you from infringing on other major players, you’d have a greater understanding of the difference in the price per dozen.

Dave Force

4 years ago

Will you be posting in “chart format” the comparison of all your ball tests? That would be a good tool to have available.

Jeff

4 years ago

Would love to see all of these ball reviews go down the spectrum to the 2-piece surlyn balls that a majority of golfers play. .

Funkaholic

4 years ago

With this ball as an option, why would you play a surlyn ball?

Mike

4 years ago

If this ball is a high spin ball as noted in the review, then it really is not the best option for a high handicapper, the usual audience for those less expensive surlyn balls. Most players of that level fight a slice, so a high spin ball is as welcome as sharks at a shipwreck.

Bill

4 years ago

Love the analysis as far as ball construction goes. The variance in quality is an issue, but not hitting any limits the value of the review. Take these to the range oe course and come back with real world results, please.

Jake DeJong

4 years ago

Course?
Too subjective methinks.

dr. bloor

4 years ago

“Take these to the range oe course and come back with real world results, please.”

That’s your job, and the results would be valid for you alone. The whole point here is just to provide information about what you’re buying.

Ray L.

4 years ago

I have never bought any Kirkland balls but find them all the time. I need an easy way to identify what era I am in possession of to determine if I want to play it !

Whitney

4 years ago

Wondering you opinion, given the cover issues occasionally seen, is this ball worth using for indoor simulation practice? I only use newer or close to new balls to protect the screen material, but if there’s a few bad dimples, might that be harmful to a high quality screen material?

Mike

4 years ago

While I’m still not sure and not sold on how these inconsistencies affect the actual results of my shots, the fact that these balls are tagged as low launch high spin is enough me to know they don’t fit my player profile. So this review was very helpful to me in that sense. I have two dozen or so that I found that are practically mint condition, anybody want to buy them? Cheap?

Jose

4 years ago

Significant change from previous years,
I will keep playing Vice

Richard

4 years ago

Is there a way for a regular joe player to determine the bad balls (concentricity issues) and toss them without having to hit bad shots? Salt water float test maybe?
Is there a significant downside to the balls that are MORE underweight?
The value at $17/doz is fantastic – would just like to know how much work I have to put in before I take them to the course to avoid the downside of the lack of QC from the factory.
Thanks for your work on these in-depth tests.

Tony Covey

4 years ago

The Epson salt can provide some insight, but it’s not entirely reliable.

A lighter ball isn’t going to be as long, but I’m more concerned with the consistency of the weight than the number itself.

Apart from the layering issues, this ball is interesting. Size was inconsistent from ball to ball, but at least they were all round. Weight was inconsistent, but they were all conforming. The compression range across the sample was tight, though there were a couple of small outliers and a few balls where the variance in the 3-point measurement was a little high.

From ball to ball, save the major defects, it’s not inherently bad, the bigger issue to me is that there is so much variance in the individual balls themselves.

Richard

4 years ago

Thanks for the response. As a rank amateur, and a dad with a toddler, I don’t play often. The cost for premium brands is just too high for how frequently I lose balls when I play.
I could put up with a little size/weight variance – and probably never notice the distance change – as long as they don’t curve R-L unnecessarily on me from an off-center core or non-concentric mid-layer issue.

Is there any kind of test I could do at home (limited tool investment) to find the concentric build issues without destroying the balls I want to test at home? If it’s not really possible without spending $100+ on tools, maybe it is worth it to buy the balls with significantly better factory QC.

One other suggestion for your next article – Include a link to the 2019 ball test (the one with the ranking charts brand vs brand) so people can go back and see how the balls compare on performance.

TR1PTIK

4 years ago

Not surprised with this at all given the history of the Kirkland balls, where they are produced, and pricing for them. I think the original Kirkland ball was a one -off and that if they won’t to improve quality, they will have to raise the praise to some degree.

Jerry

4 years ago

I’ve used these a couple of years ago. Liked the price, but even as an 11 handicap player, I noticed the varying performance. Now using Srixon Q-Star Tour and very satisfied with the price and performance.

Mike

4 years ago

I’ve thought about playing the q-star tours. Do you find that it gives you enough check-up and short game control? I definitely think it’s a few yards longer off the tee for me But wasn’t sure about its around the green performance.

Ken Rappold

4 years ago

As always, good info for us looking to maximize our dollar spend on products. For a higher handicap golfer, this ball may be the right price.

Barry Schwartz

4 years ago

Interesting review. When you tested this ball in 2019 it was second in wedge spin. Above you say the thicker cover could impact green side spin. Does the wedge test in your ball testing just measure full wedge shots? I haven’t played this ball but seem to be finding more of them out on the course, which means people are buying ( and losing) them.

Thanks for continuing to bring us the straight scoop.

Tony Covey

4 years ago

When we do our next robot test, the wedge test will be one of the things we’ll change. We calibrated for an 85-yard shot. At that distance/force, you’re still getting into the inner layers. Next time around we’ll hit shorter shots (somewhere between 40-65 yards). That will make the cover a much larger piece of the conversation.

Paulo

4 years ago

You don’t need to invest in a robot , just use some of the people commenting as they are more precise than a robot , tiger or most tour pros by the sounds of it ?

Emery

4 years ago

The addition of a “wet” wedge test would also help….a lot of early morning or coastal players could benefit. Thanks!

Joey

4 years ago

Yes Paulo, I get the same feeling,people are splitting hairs here

Bill Emblau

4 years ago

I’d really like to see how bad balls perform compared to good ones on an Iron Byron. How bad are bad balls?

vincent schiavo

4 years ago

Bad

Mike

4 years ago

Wouldn’t the value lie in the cost itself? A typical golfer doesn’t need a tour ball. Or a really good ball. They need a ball and plenty of them. This ball seems like exactly who it’s meant for. The cost conscious golfer who plays golf for fun and not for usga handicap. The weekend hacker. That’s why it’s in Costco and not pga stores.

Kenny B

4 years ago

Yes, I remember the original Ksig ball. I am still playing it. I have another year’s worth of balls at least.

I bought the new 3-piece balls a year ago and quickly got rid of them. Performance just wasn’t there. I never used to find Kirkland balls on the course, but I see more and more lately.

james jones

4 years ago

okay with all the scientific BS, how did it do on the range as that is what is most important to the people you’re talking to.

TR1PTIK

4 years ago

You should buy some and try it for yourself. No test can tell you how a ball will perform for YOUR swing. “All the scientific BS” says this is a junk ball, but best of luck with your endeavors.

Dama Dutcher

3 years ago

I’m a 6 and play Torrey as my home course. I use this ball exclusively. Unless you’re a scratch you will never find a better choice.

Terry

4 years ago

Thanks for another great review Tony. A member in our group plays these balls regularly and I can really see now that this is the wrong ball for his swing. I tend to find a lot of golf balls while walking during my rounds and 1 in 10 is a Kirkland. My assumption is that’s due to so many people playing them due to the low retail price.

ChadMo1

4 years ago

Man, I’m so bummed that I missed out on the initial Kirkland craze back in 2016! Those 4-piece balls were such a big deal, I never got to hit any before they became extinct from the shelves. I’ve got a big box of the new 3-piece balls, and while the study above indicates, the cost is awesome, I’m just not sure it’s worth the risk of putting a below-quality ball in play. Guess they’ll sit on my shelf and continue to collect dust. Too bad…

Ro Troia

4 years ago

return your kirkland balls to costco- they generally take returns

Dama Dutcher

3 years ago

Play them and you wont return them you’ll switch to them.

Steve S

4 years ago

Not surprising that the quality is not great. Not always true but you get what you pay for in this example. I think you folks should add an “out of balance” test. I think that it may be the most important indicator of ball performance. It does affect putting and makes side spin on full shots worse.

I will not buy this ball for another reason, diameter. The diameter affects distance. I’m surprised that more ball mfgs. aren’t making their balls on the low side of the tolerance for diameter and the high side for weight. That would give you the longest ball. See Taylormade TP5.

TR1PTIK

4 years ago

A ball that’s “out of balance” would likely be caused by concentricity and centeredness issues so that’s already covered.

Josh Ross

4 years ago

I love these tests so much. I’m a Snell guy but love reading each of these because it’s so interesting.

Adam Flowers

4 years ago

Thanks again, Tony,. Honestly, then I expected. Even vith ~25% of balls flagged, you’re just not going to beat $16.65/dozen.

I think the bigger issue is people using this ball when its spin profile doesn’t fit them!

CoryO

4 years ago

I’m no ball snob as I’ll gladly play what I find on the course, but something almost always feel off when I hit these Kirklands (especially compared to true premium balls). They need to get back to the Korean manufacturer.

Pete

4 years ago

That’s not going to happen, Costco was sued for patent infringement when their balls were made by that same Korean company who made balls for other companies, and used the same materials supplied by a couple big names, and the same process and cores used for Kirkland as the major player that paid them to make. It’s just like China, a big brand designs irons, then pays the Chinese foundry to manufacture the irons and they do, but they also sell the molds out the back door to a counterfeiter who makes the same irons and sells them cheaper under a name like Kirkland.

Dama Dutcher

3 years ago

Not true. Their 4 piece was an over run with patents that the ordering company didn’t have the nuts to put out. Kirkland never designed those balls. I play the 3 piece to a sold 5-6 and I’m 64 and play Torrey. The ball is bank. People freak with my drop and stop low 3 yard chips shots Yeah it’s 5 yards shorter off the tee but the feel is better than a PV1.

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