MyGolfSpy Ball Lab – A Different Kind of Golf Ball Test
Golf Balls

MyGolfSpy Ball Lab – A Different Kind of Golf Ball Test

MyGolfSpy Ball Lab – A Different Kind of Golf Ball Test

You’re probably familiar with our annual Most Wanted tests and Buyer’s Guides. Their purpose is to help golfers identify the best products for their game. While the goal remains the same, today we’re announcing a different kind of testing program.

It’s called MyGolfSpy Ball Lab. I haven’t been this excited about an initiative since we committed to large-scale, data-driven golf club testing nearly a decade ago. In some respects, Ball Lab is even more exciting because we’re seeking to uncover the kind of things that are almost impossible for golfers to discover on their own.

Quantifying Golf Ball Quality

One of the many insights gleaned from last year’s ball test is that every ball has two sets of specifications. Most every golfer focuses on the performance spec: speed, launch, spin – stuff we can all see to some degree. Seldom, it seems, do golfers consider the quality spec. It’s the part of the equation that speaks to the build quality; how well a ball is made and whether the manufacturer can produce that same ball over and over again. It’s the stuff that’s literally hidden beneath the cover.

That’s where Ball Lab comes in. It represents our effort to better quantify the quality and consistency of the golf balls on the market today. The ultimate goal of Ball Lab is to provide you with much-needed and deserved independent clarity into the quality side of the ball discussion.

We’ve spent months working behind the scenes to make this happen. We’ve consulted with leading ball manufacturers to understand what’s important, how to look for it, and the tools required to do the job right. We’ve spent hours learning from the man who makes most of our gauges. It has already been an experience and we’re just getting started.

We believe golfers want to know which brands make the highest quality, most consistent golf balls and which brands are peddling sub-par product. We’re going to sort it out for you.

Ball Lab Tooling

Out of the gate, the MyGolfSpy Ball Lab will consist of five tools.

If it proves successful and the demand is there, we’ll look to expand our testing capabilities. I already have some ideas. Here’s the list of what we have and how we plan to use it.

Model 55-M Golf Ball Compression Tester

MyGolfSpy Ball Lab Compression Gauge

While there’s no standard-issue compression tester, the OK Automation 55-M is widely used across the ball industry. Not only will it allow us to identify which balls offer the most consistent compression by measuring every ball with the same tool, we can reliably compare compression across models and brands without relying on OEM numbers. Who really makes the slowest softest ball in golf? We’ll find the answer.

Model 95-M Diameter Measurement Gauge

 

Effectively a size gauge, the 95-M will allow us to take diameter measurements and determine roundness. If a brand struggles to produce golf balls that are actually round, we’re going to tell you about it.

Ohaus Pioneer PX 323 Precision Electronic Balance

MyGolfSpy Ball Lab Precision Balance

Accurate to within 0.001 g, we’ll use the scale to verify weight conformity while also tracking the weight consistency of each model we test.

Milwaukee M12 Cordless PVC Cutter

MyGolfSpy Ball Lab FindItCutIt

The workhorse of #FindItCutIt, we’re going to keep using the M12 to cut golf balls. We’ll cut a random selection of balls from each dozen and grade them for centeredness and layer concentricity.

Tigh Tolerance 1.680″ NO-GO Gauge

 

The custom No-Go gauge from Zero Check is used to determine if the ball meets the USGA’s minimum size requirement.

Consistent Measurement

MyGolfSpy Ball Lab Size Gauge

To maintain consistent environmental conditions for testing, balls will be stored in a temperature-controlled humidor at 70 degrees with 50-per-cent relative humidity.

Gauges will be calibrated before each ball model is tested.

Retail Balls Only

To ensure everything is on the up and up and nothing gets pre-sorted on its way to us, MyGolfSpy will purchase all of our test balls at retail. The plan is to test three dozen of each model. All 3 dozen will be cut for further analysis.

You can expect some other cool experiments from the Ball Lab along the way.

We’re in the process of sourcing golf balls for the first round of testing. It’s going to take us a little bit of time to get everything in, acclimated and measured. Before we start rolling out MyGolfSpy Ball Lab reports, we need to build our database so we can accurately classify balls.

While that’s happening, you can expect us to trickle out some of what we find.

We can’t wait to get started.

Editor’s Note: This post has been upgraded to reflect the latest changes to our testing equipment.

Help Support MyGolfSpy #BallLab

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

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

Donate to MGS


Amount

Frequency

For You

For You

News
Apr 22, 2024
Strength Training for Golfers: Building a Strong and Stable Core
Golf Balls
Apr 22, 2024
Callaway Supersoft Mother’s Day Bouquet
Golf Technology
Apr 21, 2024
Testers Wanted: Shot Scope V5
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.

      Kyle Sinclair

      4 years ago

      Tony, you might as well trash this years test & start on next year…..
      It is September already…. ????‍♂️

      Reply

      Ian Mik

      4 years ago

      Any update on timing of Ball Lab launch? Super excited to see this (or any 2020 ball review data) now that we’re in summer.

      Reply

      Jake

      4 years ago

      Ditto, would love to know how far out 2020 results are. Coming soon?

      Reply

      Paulo

      4 years ago

      Looking forward to the results. I really hope you guys test white v yellow balls too . Nobody else has , and playing both white and yellow pro v’s I’m convinced the cover on the yellow is firmer , despite what they say …

      Reply

      Papson#2

      4 years ago

      In the proposed testing, is there a methodology for testing the rollout of matte finish balls vs non-matte finish? I see some inconsistencies with the matte finish on the green.

      Reply

      Dragonpen

      4 years ago

      I think this is a great idea and service to the golf community. My concern is that you will be testing same batch or near same batch balls. Why not ask us, your readers to send 1 new ball from our own bag. This way you will receive balls sold over a few months from many areas of the country/world. This would go a long way toward proving consistency.
      I am personally excited to see if the belief that balls are out of balance is true.

      Thanks for your efforts, I use your site as a trusted reference.

      Reply

      Mike

      4 years ago

      I realize you can’t test every ball out there, but I would like to see how some of the really low budget balls compare. I’ve been playing the Top Flite D2+ feel golf ball for the last few years and really like it. They sell for $18 a 15 pack, or $8 a 15 pack when on sale, which is quite often.

      Reply

      Randy

      4 years ago

      I concur. Used to be the top sales brand and the longest ball in golf. Lots of D2 variants plus now TopFlite Gamer ball. Wasn’t Lee Trevino one of thier tour stars, great golfer and guy.

      Reply

      John

      4 years ago

      Spalding now has a 3 piece Urethane Tour Ball at Walmart for $25/dozen

      Bob Montle

      4 years ago

      How about testing to answer these questions:
      1) How does a ball perform after 10 or 20 hits vs when it was new?
      Effect of use on balls
      2) How does a new ball perform after sitting for a year vs when it was produced?
      Effect of aging on balls
      3) How does a new ball perform after a week submerged vs when it was produced?
      Effect of submersion on balls

      Reply

      Dave Tutelman

      4 years ago

      I really like the thought, Bob. But there is a serious sticking point to #2. MGS will have no way to publish the results in this year’s testing. And, if they do another series of tests in, say, 3 years, They will have two different things to report: new balls without your #2, and old balls — probably different models even if the name is the same — have been stored for over a year.

      BTW, #2 and #3 are something that would not be done by anybody but MGS! The appeal of those tests relates only to balls NOT BOUGHT but found. What golf ball company wants to make this known, either good or bad results? And the major magazine testing tends to be in support of their advertisers. That’s the difference between the magazine tests and MGS.

      Reply

      Randy

      4 years ago

      IMO and based on my 50 years of experience #1 and #2 no difference. I play balls that are many years old both old and new. I have boxes of new old balls. #3 find a few water balls every year and all perform well.

      I am in Canada can only play for 5 months mid May to mid October balls stay in the garage with +30C to -40C in metal cabinet and in my golf bag.

      I played a lot of my original balls from 1970’s this year, used them for waterholes since I wanted to save my good balls, little did I realize that looking on internet lots of those old balls some in new condition were going for $12 US a ball, so value wise should have used new balls and sold my old balls.

      Reply

      Randy

      4 years ago

      Sorry meant last season, not this season, has not started in Canada and may not due to the pandemic.

      Sure missed watching the Masters this year.

      Javier

      4 years ago

      I would add:
      4) How do the different balls react to differing temperatures

      Playing in the extreme NW (Alaska), I have friends that are convinced that the softer balls are better for the colder climate here. It would be nice to find out the data on the temperature variance.

      Reply

      Mackie

      4 years ago

      Very interested in seeing the results. Wont change my ball choice though as ive been playing b-stones for the last several years. Thanks for last years ball test proving i was on the right track anyway

      Reply

      Stevegp

      4 years ago

      I am really looking forward to your findings and the results of the testing. I appreciate your efforts.
      I have donated to MGS several times in the past and I now will be sending you another donation.
      Keep up the insightful and helpful work.

      Reply

      Radar

      4 years ago

      Well done Amigo !!

      Reply

      dcorun

      4 years ago

      I can’t wait to see the results because I’m not buying any new balls this year until I have a few to compare from your test.

      Reply

      KevinA

      4 years ago

      Very excited to see this. I got a Check Go ball balancer last year. I checked 4 dozen Kirkland balls and 2/3 were not balanced. I checked a dozen Taylor made TP5’s and all but 2 we’re balanced. Big difference in overall quality control from my sample.. on the check go, it a ball comes up with inconsistent midlines, it’s balanced.

      Reply

      Shane

      4 years ago

      Can’t wait for y’all to start either!

      Reply

      tony@CIC

      4 years ago

      Tony C. I’m stoked! can’t wait to see the results.

      FYI guys, one of the best golf investments you can make is to support MGS. by being a donor. It’s a small investment that’ll help you cut through the marketing BS of some golf companies.

      Reply

      wbn

      4 years ago

      You guys keep coming up with great ideas. Keep up the good work. We all appreciate the info you pass along as we know it will not be biased. The ball is an important piece of equipment and should be reviewed. I have wondered in the past if my new ball was out of round or balance after a few missed putts.

      Reply

      John Cooper

      4 years ago

      I live in Thailand and was going to buy some Inesis golf balls, will these be tested? If so, I shall wait because before your last test I used Callaway Chrome Soft.

      Reply

      Franz

      4 years ago

      MGS has already tested the Inesis Tour 900 (was in the best “value” balls for last year big ball test).
      You can go and buy them, they’re very cheap and really quite good!

      Reply

      shortside

      4 years ago

      As I’m already stocked for a Covid-19 delayed season I hope this isn’t filled with disappointment. Great work MGS! Looking forward to it.

      Stay safe all.

      Reply

      Randy

      4 years ago

      Please test TopFlite balls as well like Gamer, etc.

      Reply

      BR

      4 years ago

      This is going to be epic. I am just glad my cell phone won’t ring off the hook and/or email inbox fill up like I think it will for MGS team. :) LOL Seriously much needed for the consumer. Appreciate MGS!!!!

      Reply

      Dean Dodge

      4 years ago

      Everybody – go donate a little $$$ – let’s keep these guys going.

      Reply

      Richard Schmidt

      4 years ago

      I’m with Dean this is a great source of information. If you haven’t been playing lately and buying balls donate some to these guys. I’m sending mine in today.

      Reply

      Willie T

      4 years ago

      Will be interesting to see what the difference is this year in the overall QC of the various brands are. The statistical side of me loves the gear you guys are incorporating to make qualitative analysis.

      Reply

      Steve

      4 years ago

      Glad that you mentioned some of the DTC balls would be included Tony. Like others who have said they have found these to be as good if not superior playing them. Hopefully the ball I have found to be the overall performance ball for me being an “old” senior with a 83mph swing speed.
      The Oncore Elixr !!

      Reply

      Rex Takasugi

      4 years ago

      I’m really looking forward to the results of your testing! As several others have mentioned, I also use a Check Go ball spinner to spin balance the golf ball prior to play. I feel that spin balancing the golf ball helps both off the tee and for putting. It would really be helpful to have your tests include some measurement of out-of-balance for golf balls (or how centered the center of gravity actually is). The salt water method provides a rough, subjective estimation of how out-of-balance a golf ball might be, and I also make a subjective judgement by how difficult it is to get a golf ball spinning in the Check Go ball spinner. A golf ball that is way out-of-balance jumps around and doesn’t get spinning very well, whereas an in-balance ball gets spinning right away very smoothly and stays spinning smoothly. The golf ball manufacturers must have ways to test for this other than a salt water bath or a Check Go ball spinner and maybe you can get your hands on whatever tool they use to check for out-of-balance balls. I have found that the TaylorMade TP5 and TP5x balls are consistently the most in-balance balls I’ve tested and TaylorMade’s less expensive balls also rate highly. I assume that their manufacturing process is somehow better or their quality control is better, but I really have no idea. Keep up the good work!

      Reply

      Ranny Reynolds

      4 years ago

      I would suggest muting some of your balls at different sources, one dozen each from your area golf shop, a big box store elsewhere and a dozen from the Internet, like Amazon or other source.

      Reply

      golfho

      4 years ago

      Exactly…i would not put it past manufacturers to double check quality control (like they do for tour players?) balls for shipping to golf stores in proximity to MGS facility in VA. I think best to buy all online from different stores in US…especially with Chinese Corona situation.

      Reply

      Tank

      4 years ago

      Glad your doing a test like this. Bottom line,, it’s a ball!!
      Maybe we’ll find out that virtually all balls are “fairly” equal and the rest of it is between our ears.
      Maybe it’s something the manufacturers don’t want us to see!
      Maybe it’s something else…
      Looking forward to it.

      Reply

      Steven

      4 years ago

      As you guy’s probably know, the tour Pro’s get balls directly from the factory that are tested and selected to the quality control standards the “public golfing minion’s” will never see. I’ve been fortunate to have played the Callaway Tour SR3 factory ball (5 doz. to be precise) and believe you can pick up on subtle difference in ball performance especially drives off tee.

      Reply

      Lou

      4 years ago

      It will be fun to compare your results from last year to this. In your Iron Byron test, Snell won by a mile and that was heavily publicized. Their ball was so much longer than the next best it’s a wonder how any other balls, including Pro V1x, were even sold. Now you are going to conduct tests in even more depth. It will be interesting to see if Snell, besides in a massive distance victory, wipes out the field in all these new tests.

      Reply

      John Burnsworth

      4 years ago

      Great job,I have already stopped playing some balls that had bad performance / manufacturing in your previous reports. I look forward to the report and seeing how the ball/s I like compare in your testing.

      Reply

      Tom

      4 years ago

      Tony I know you say soft is short but I still like a softer feeling golf ball, I play pro v yellow and I much prefer it over the x and same can be said for srixon balls and if it’s costing me a few yards oh well

      Reply

      Mike

      4 years ago

      Sure, soft maybe short at 100-110 MPH swing speed. But at 85 mph, at least for me, that is not necessarily the case. I’ve done the testing to confirm this also. Bottom line, take the time to do your own testing. You may find that smell and vice balls are as good as the OEMs costing twice as much. Or you may find a softer ball works just as well for you at a fraction of the price.

      Reply

      Rob B.

      4 years ago

      This is really great guys, thanks for going the extra mile.

      Reply

      LABillyboy

      4 years ago

      I’d like to see comparison of a new ball (never hit) and one that’s played 18 holes (14 driver hits, 18 iron hits and 4 wedges) then do it for 36 holes… How do balls hold up?

      Reply

      Lloyd Davis

      4 years ago

      A golf ball that’s lasted through 36 holes is a unicorn. I’ve heard tales about it, but I’m pretty sure it’s fiction!

      Reply

      Rick Sanders

      4 years ago

      They seem to wonder off!

      Mark Hunermund

      4 years ago

      Since the mid 70’s I’ve been balancing my golf balls. Back then I floated them in epsom salts to determine the heavy and light ends of the ball. In early 2000’s I started using the Check-go ball spinner. Most companies have lines on their balls. Callaway now with the 3 line system in particular and if the ball is not balanced to the lines, what’s the point. It would be interesting to see if any company has a ball that is truly balanced to the markings.
      I play, for lack of a better term, premium balls and have not had any 2 balls per dozen spin or float the same. Since when rolled a ball will try to seek it’s heavy to light configuration, balance point, putts will be missed due to this misbalance.

      Reply

      FISHHEAD

      4 years ago

      very excited to see the details

      Reply

      Randjf

      4 years ago

      And I thought the PVC cutter was the only tool you needed LOL! Seriously, my golf spy put ball manufacturers on their tiptoes, dancing around the subject with your testing to date. This should have them kicking and screaming…

      Reply

      Vince Chapman

      4 years ago

      Two years ago I could hit a Chrome Soft about 15 yds farther off the tee than any other ball I would hit.Last year I recognized the problem you guys pointed out. Waiting to see these results.

      Reply

      Art

      4 years ago

      Thank you MGS! Your first pass at ball testing illuminated some significant, long standing failures in ball manufacturing. Clearly, many of us are excited to see you improve on your process!

      In addition to this set of high-tech gadgets, are you considering a salt water float test? Not as sexy as the other instruments–But if you can find the lightest portion of the golf ball,, then make your M12 cut squarely through that point, you are more likely to observe those uncentered layers.

      Reply

      Martien Schwencke

      4 years ago

      It would be nice if you can compare them with some balls de tour players use in tournaments ..are the they same as we use ?

      Reply

      Gordo

      4 years ago

      I’d like to see you do what consumer reports did in 2006 – take your retail balls and hit them with an Ironbyron to see which goes furthest, which stray off line the most and which spin the most. Could hit them with a driver and a 8 iron Consumer reports result was that, tied for best ball, was a $14.00/dozen Nike Power Distance Super Soft. Long time ago but very revealing.

      Reply

      Dugan

      4 years ago

      Your about a year behind. That test you ask was done at the beginning of 2019. Look it up

      Reply

      Hitch

      4 years ago

      I love all the stuff you guys do, but this was by far my favorite thing last year.
      I still pull it up about every other month.

      Reply

      David Dimmich

      4 years ago

      I sold or gave away all my Titleist, Callaway, and various other makes to go with Snell exclusively. Sure hope they hold up well….

      Reply

      Jerry Lynn

      4 years ago

      I loved the Chrome soft until they made that change two or three years ago. Now I wouldn’t have one. They ruined it.

      I also got some Snell balls based on the test. The Prov1 x for me is about 10 yards longer than the Snell and the Chrome Soft off the tee. Plus I’ve never hit a prob 1 x that was not a quality ball.

      Reply

      Glenn Keyes

      4 years ago

      Awesome stuff. Any way to see how balanced the ball is? Centred core etc? Doesn’t Decambeau float them in some solution? Not sure how that works.

      Reply

      Dave Tutelman

      4 years ago

      Good suggestion! That suggests two measurements, actually.
      (1) How balanced they are out of the box.
      (2) How balanced they are after, say, a dozen drives. It was thought, when Pelz talked about this in his “Putt Like the Pros” in the late 1980s, that the typical ball got knocked out of balance in not very many golf shots. I think a good measure of quality is durability, in this and other specifications.

      Reply

      mark

      4 years ago

      Tony Covey – Being able to come up with some sort of scientific measure to compare how well-balanced any particular brand and make of golf ball is per dozen as well as how consistently well-balanced they are would be perhaps the most important bit of information any golfer could have. And if anyone could help you come up with a sound, scientific analytical method of measuring this parameter, it would be David Tutelman.

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      With the solid rubber core construction on the modern golf ball, it’s basically impossible to knock them out of balance. Without wound balls, from what I understand anyway, it was a legitimate concern.

      As far as balance goes, my hope is that those issues will manifest themselves in other ways. I didn’t cover it in the post, but for both compression and size we’ll be taking multiple measurements on each ball. We’re going to order the first 20 models this week, but in just playing with some of the stuff I have around the house, I’ve already found some interesting things.

      Compression, and to a lesser extent, size can vary by a significant margin on the same ball. We’ll know more once we have a larger data set, but preliminarily it looks like +/- 1.5 compression points in a golf ball is good. I’ve found as much as an 8-point variance. I suspect that the same things that cause those compression and size inconsistencies are what causes a ball to be out of balance.

      I’m going to run some additional tests to determine whether or not that’s actually the case.

      And of course…we’ll be cutting balls open to check the guts for anything that could be problematic as well.

      Dave Tutelman

      4 years ago

      Mark, thanks for the vote of confidence. Tony is very good at the design of testing. I’ll be glad to offer any help I can if requested, but don’t think he needs it.

      I buy Tony’s surmise about solid vs wound cores. Premium balls had wound cores when Pelz made the observation I cited. I can believe that a solid core would be more immune to having balance knocked off by being hit a few dozen times.

      But I still think that balance and consistency of balance, even if just out of the box, are worth measuring.

      Will Kuchta

      4 years ago

      This will be very interesting, and exactly why I contribute to MGS. Will you specify the ball’s composition, especially the cover? I will definitely wait to purchase any new balls. Of course it’s snowing today in Rochester NY and the state closed the golf courses till further notice

      Reply

      William Dickman

      4 years ago

      I conducted a test 3 years ago. 7 major balls were used . I put down 2 parallel chalklines 3 1/2″ apart 25′ long. On a level green I used a stimpmeter to gauge the green speed (12.5) and place a stripe around each ball , using the stimpmeter I rolled each ball and measured the distance the ball rolled until it started to ” wobble “. A “Check Go Pro” was used to insure the centroid axis of each ball was equal. Of course the accuracy of the test was limited by human vision to determine at what point the ball started to wobble. No laser technology used to be precise. But the results were interesting all three Bridgestone balls scored best. Next was the Calloway Chorme, followed by the Taylormade ball and the Titleist Pro V and ProV1 scored last. Last time I played with the ProV1. My putting stats have increased ever since then. The strangest part is that the top 10 best putters on the PGA use FIVE different brands of balls. ???? William Dickman.

      Reply

      Poppa Jump

      4 years ago

      Will mail order golfballs be included and if so how can you order them incognto?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      Yes. And yes, this is something we’ve considered. Brands like Snell and Vice, and a couple of other small brands we might test, for example, are available through 3rd party sellers. For the other guys…we’ll keep our names off the orders to make sure nothing is sorted there either.

      Reply

      MIgregb

      4 years ago

      I’m REALLY curious to see how many of last year’s find it-cut it offenders have cleaned up their products. We already know Callaway had been working on their problem loooong before MGS called them out (yeah, right!), but still curious whether anything has made it to market yet.

      Reply

      Jeremy

      4 years ago

      Wow – this next level. I’ll never hesitate to continue donating with this constant progression and improvement. Doing. It. Right.

      Reply

      Walter

      4 years ago

      Great news, can’t wait to see the first report. Will MGS still do the annual golf ball report like last year? Keep up the great work and stay safe.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      Based on release cycles for golf balls – particularly premium models – we’ll likely do the performance test every two years.

      Reply

      BOBBY ROSE

      4 years ago

      60 YEARS PLAYING OUR GREAT GAME. MANAGING CHARITY GOLF OUTINGS FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS ON THE EAST COAST. LOOK TO SUPPLY MY OUTING PLAYERS WITH THE BEST. YOUR TECHNO INFO HAS BEEN HELPFUL IN THE PAST. SELL A LOT OF GOLF BALLS TO MY OUTINGS AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE UPCOMING TEST RESULTS. CARRYING A 5 HANDICAP, I CURRENTLY PLAY AND SUPPLY SNELL MTB-X TO MY EVENTS. I DON’T POSSESS THE TECHNO TOOLS YOU HAVE BUT FROM A “PLAYERS” EVALUATION THIS BALL DOES IT ALL…ESPECIALLY AT IT’S PRICE. I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO READ YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION ON MY THOUGHTS.

      Reply

      Dugan

      4 years ago

      Sir, no need for yelling.

      Andrew Han

      4 years ago

      Dugan, dude he is probably 80+ years old. Based on his content, he is writing in all caps for visibility.

      GilB

      4 years ago

      This could be a very eye opening testing. I can’t wait to see the variables in manufacturing processes and results. Keep up the great work guys, it’s invaluable.. Stay safe during these troubling times.

      Reply

      Jamie McCann

      4 years ago

      I’m just the average golfer with an index that hovers between 18.3 and 19.8. I don’t play nearly enough as I would need to nor like. to lower my handicap. Currently, I’m playing the Bridgestone E-6, which I must say I absolutely love. I have tried other brands with their ball that compare themselves to the E-6, and while I’m too inconsistent to really be discriminating, I find the E-6 to fly straighter…the most important criteria for my game.

      I’ll be interested to see the results of your test to see if it is indeed the best ball for my game, or if there’s one that I ought to change to.

      Thank you.

      Jamie
      (949) 292-8166

      Reply

      GolfHo

      4 years ago

      Hey Jamie shall i give you a ring to discuss the E6?

      Chinese corona boredom.

      Reply

      mackdaddy9

      4 years ago

      Tony,
      From past testing. Were the hardest balls the longest? Did they fall in line by compression from highest to lowest in distance? Is that over all clubs tested or just drivers?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      Probably more accurate to say firmest balls are the fastest. The correlation between ball speed and compression undeniable. Launch and spin differences can influence the actual distance. That applies to all clubs, though with irons soft balls will tend to be longer because as club speed declines, the speed advantage of firmer balls declines with it (we swing irons slower). At lower speeds, the lower spin properties common to most soft balls takes over, so you’ll often get longer carry distances. The caveat is that lower spin diminishes green stopping power.

      Reply

      Mike

      4 years ago

      The ball testing that MGS is doing is a game-changer. Before last year there was no resource that a consumer had to compare balls. The data provided gives everyone a place to start. The quality issues for me was totally unexpected. The industry had to know about it but most consumers had no idea. MGS is pushing the industry to provide a better product to everyone.

      Reply

      cksurfdude

      4 years ago

      This is gonna be really interesting .. thx MGS!!

      One thing I’d like to see, though, if there’s a good way to test and a meaningful way to quantify it — is the “spin balance” or the center of gravity vs the geometric center of the ball.

      Not sure if this is implied in the concentricity measure?

      I’m thinking of where you found Chrome Softs could potentially induce more side spin, or the CoG alignment claim of the new MaxFlis……..

      Reply

      Brian

      4 years ago

      Tony, This sounds great, can’t wait to see what you find. I think you’ve touched on durability past reports, but I’m really interested in seeing if/how much performance degrades over time. Is there any plans to test balls after 1/2 rounds to see how they hold up? I know the logistics of this may be harder, but I think it would be a valuable metric.
      Thanks

      Reply

      Francis Kennedy

      4 years ago

      I’ve always been amazed at high handicappers using $4 balls expecting

      Reply

      Dokes

      4 years ago

      Agreed. However, think of how bad they might be otherwise. Additionally, it does spice up the hunt in the hopes of finding an occasional ProV instead of a TopFlight..

      Reply

      Brian Pickton

      4 years ago

      I’m not.
      If you’re already a high handicap player like yours truly using a crap ball will only give you a worse result. Optimizing your tools means focusing on improving your game is not wasted, as opposed to try to figuring out why a ball flew into the trees due to no fault of the player., but because the ball had an eccentric centre of gravity. Callaway, I am looking at you.

      When I switched from Chrome Soft to Bridgestone BX I dropped shots from my average score and have started shooting the lowest scores in my life. I am in my late 60’s, not an age when you expect to see a lot of improvement.

      My hat is off to MGS for this new level of testing. IMHO the USGA should have been doing this long ago.

      Reply

      JimL

      4 years ago

      Really great idea and I am looking forward to learning about your results. I know it may be difficult to have a tight timeline, but what is your best guess for when we might see a first report….. a matter of days, weeks, months? Thanks for your work.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      Weeks would be my guess. We need to get product in and then start collecting the data.

      Reply

      gary

      4 years ago

      This is great. After you have completed all testing you could plan for a further test by setting various brands of balls in water for a period of time. This may determine exactly what changes if any have occurred to a ball’s performance being soaked in water.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      This is actually one of the secondary tests we have bland. Submerse some balls in water for a year and see what happens.

      Reply

      DawgDaddy

      4 years ago

      That is awesome, I hear so many conflicting things about “water” balls it will be nice to see some actual data. Thanks.

      Randy

      4 years ago

      Hey water balls will be the only ball most people will find and play now in these pandemic times. unless they take some Lysol wipes with them on the course.

      Boyd Davis

      4 years ago

      Very interested in learning results of testing!!!

      Reply

      Steve Sheppard

      4 years ago

      This is great and long overdue for golfer consumers! Thanks! Looking forward to what you come up with.

      Reply

      Pat

      4 years ago

      Alright!!! cannot wait to see how this turns out.

      Reply

      Michael Wilson

      4 years ago

      Thanks, …. I help to support your website and think it is great…. What about the USGA, PGA, …. that are looking to control the distances of ball market?

      Reply

      RT

      4 years ago

      Excited to see the test results and the processes. Great that you’re making blind purchases of balls. . Is there a way to test such claims like” spin skin”
      covering or coating on balls?

      Reply

      RT

      4 years ago

      Excited to see the test results and the processes. Great that you’re making blind purchases of balls. This reminds me of my ol’ race car days of specs and tech either you pass or your out . Is there a way to test such claims like” spin skin”
      covering or coating on balls?

      Reply

      Steve S

      4 years ago

      When you measure “roundness” with the M-95 gauge is that like measuring the diameter in 4 different orientations. Does the electronic balance just measure weight or can it do “out of balance”?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      The scale doesn’t provide an out of balance capability, but the compression gauge (we take multiple measurements) can give us a sense of that – as will continuing to cut balls.

      Reply

      Toby

      4 years ago

      Can you do the same testing after the balls have been hit by a 90 and a 105 mph driver swing (50xs each)?

      Reply

      Chris B

      4 years ago

      Here’s the key point: “RETAIL BALLS ONLY”

      I know the new toys are cool but getting the balls through the consumer distribution channels helps ensure you’re not getting cherry picked samples.

      Reply

      Mark V

      4 years ago

      You guys do incredible work. Just went to PayPal and contributed to help your continued research.

      Reply

      Charlie Carmon

      4 years ago

      Thanks for what you do very interesting

      Reply

      Andrew

      4 years ago

      This may not be something you can test without a wind tunnel or some sort of laser scanner, but dimple consistency would be something I’d really like checked. I think we’ve probably all seen the Titleist videos of what happens when the dimples are imperceptibly deeper on one side of the ball.. From what I’ve seen an uneven coating of paint could cause ball flight issues.

      Reply

      Steve

      4 years ago

      Really cool! It would also be interesting in the future if you could get access to an Instron to be able to plot force (lbs) vs compression (inches from nominal) to see the effect of multi layer construction.

      Reply

      Michael H

      4 years ago

      Thanks for doing this. I’m also looking forward to the data that this generates. Hope I don’t have to throw out the 2 dozen Maxfli Tour X’s I just bought. lol

      Reply

      hckymeyer

      4 years ago

      This is awesome T! Can’t wait to start seeing the results. Is there any sort of tool that exists to differentiate or quantify cover hardness/durability beside just hitting wedges? I’ve always been curious on white ball vs colored ball in the same model. Maybe yellow just doesn’t show scrapes as easily but it feels like yellow Z-Star XV’s hold up better over the course of a round. than white ones. But i don’t have any true data to back that up.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      I’m already starting to kick the tires a bit on things like cover hardness and durability (both cover and full ball). There are some inexpensive hardness testers out there, but to a man the ball guys we spoke with told us the reliability/accuracy is suspect. Doing harness testing the right way would involve peeling covers and shaping them into a puck of sort and then testing that. It’s an expensive process from both a tooling and time perspective. We’ll see how this goes…what the response is, and to some degree, how much readers are willing to support it. If it resonates with golfers, everything is on the table.

      Reply

      storm319

      3 years ago

      @Tony Covey

      Any further thought or development on cover hardness/duromoter testing? I am sure differences in cover thickness, material, and production method not to mention the impact of the hardness of the next layer may not allow for an apples to apples comparison, but it would still be nice to quantify cover hardness in some way even only to compare between similarly constructed balls.

      JohnSmalls

      4 years ago

      Awesome news, cannot wait to see what data is gathered from testing. Is the 55-M the same tool that was used for compression testing in the 2019 buyers guide?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      4 years ago

      No. For that one, the tool we had access to is a different model that required conversion to the Atti compression standard. That’s neither good nor bad…just different. I expect the numbers will vary a bit, and based on some preliminary testing, our tester will typically (though not always, I don’t think) show lower numbers. Based on a single sample, for instance, the prior gen Tour B X that was in our test had an average compression of about 110 on the other gauge. On ours, it’s closer to 105.

      Reply

      Dave Davis

      4 years ago

      I’ve always found the higher the compression, the further the balls go. The only difference was the “feel”. That might be an important factor in choosing a ball.

      TR1PTIK

      4 years ago

      Still curious to see what numbers look like for the new Bridgestone balls. If I recall your tweet the other day correctly, the new Tour B X measured 101. Any chance their new cover delivers as promised and provides same or even better ball speed? Would we even expect to see much difference in 4pts?

      Rick Gray

      4 years ago

      I may have to hold off my next ball purchase until I see the results of the test. Looking forward to the 2020 results.

      Reply

      dpanchuk

      4 years ago

      Great job MyGolfSpy. Well thought out using consistent validation tools.. Looking forward to the testing.and results.

    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.

    News
    Apr 22, 2024
    Strength Training for Golfers: Building a Strong and Stable Core
    Golf Balls
    Apr 22, 2024
    Callaway Supersoft Mother’s Day Bouquet
    Golf Technology
    Apr 21, 2024
    Testers Wanted: Shot Scope V5
    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.