Ball Test - Golf magazine

2456

Comments

  • klpraklpra Members Posts: 641
    TheHomez wrote on Jan 6 2008, 11:18 PM:
    Did they happen to test the Nike Ignite or Srixon AD333 by any chance? If so how did they do?




    The Nike Ignite and Srixon were in the middle of the pack as far as distance. In the spin category the Ignite was low spin at 7071 rpm's and the AD33 was considered medium spin at 8407 rpm's.
  • klpraklpra Members Posts: 641
    jswjr wrote on Jan 6 2008, 10:26 PM:
    Could someone provide the top 5 balls distance-wise for the 90 mph SS ?




    Top 5 balls for distance at 90 mph swing speed. 137 MPH ball speed. 13.75 degree launch angle. 2900 rpm were:



    1. TM TP Black- 259.1

    2. Noodle+- 259.0

    3. TM TP Red- 258.6

    4. NXT Extreme- 257.5

    5. PD Soft- 255.9



    Consider this....Even if you have 90 mph swing speed but your launch angle and spin are different than what was tested you might find out that some of the other balls would work better for you. Thats the variable here....As the article stated...You have to hit a lot of different balls to see what really works for all of your swing numbers and the type of player you are.
  • OnebulldogsOnebulldogs Members Posts: 1,362
    I don't have the story in front of me so I can quote exact numbers; however, I was really impressed by the thought that went into their test and their willingness to present raw data that advertisors might not like.



    What I took away from it:

    1. The Platinum One is by far the "Shortest Ball" suitable for guys with a lot of swing speed who want a ball that will spin back on a concrete green coated with oil. It may be short, but it is a spin machine.

    2. TaylorMade has to be very happy with the results. In each price point, the TM Balls were at/or near the longest ball while hitting appropriate spin targets.

    3. The Wilson balls were a nice surprise. Although not standout numbers, they are definitely in the game.



    Can't wait to try the Top Flite Gamer.
  • bladestrikerbladestriker No. Cal.Members Posts: 1,177 ✭✭
    That magazine lost any credibility with me when they did there driver test. What a JOKE!! The G10 won hands down in length, dispersion and accuracy and they pick Titleist who actually did very poor in their test??? Data means nothing to them.



    That said, the Nike One Platinum is a great ball regardless of what they say.
    ‘16 M2 10.5º AD-DI 75X
    M2 tour 3 wood Kuro Kage 70x
    JPX 900 tour 4-PW PX lz 6.5
    Vokey 52º 56º 60º-PX lz 6.0
    Scotty Cameron AoP Newport 2 
    "I still wear full spikes so people know when I show up to the course, I am there to ball out."-Bigmean
  • MiloshMilosh Members Posts: 306
    edited Jan 7, 2008 #36
    It was an excellent article.



    I cancelled my subscription to Golf Digest because of their unbelievably stupid reviews.



    The point, Harry Pudenda, of having a Iron Byron do the testing is that the only difference between the results is the balls and nothing else. So you can DIRECTLY compare a Pro V1 to a Platinum Black with actual numbers (no stars and color codings?!). The choice of 90 mph is the average golfer swing speed. They also did 105 mph. If you swing faster than that, then you should be a pro. image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />



    ETA: I'm going to look seriously at the Wilson TX4s now.
  • hammer4172hammer4172 Members Posts: 11
    ZBigStick wrote on Jan 7 2008, 05:32 PM:
    Softfade,



    Just go to gppgolf.com and get the Tour B-330-S for a good deal image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />



    Don't compromise although the e5+ could be a fantastic ball now with the 330 dimple pattern.




    THanks I will give them a look see. I usually put down my premiums this time of the year here in Atlanta. Until they get all of the leaves up on the edge of the fairways. My club courses wind through subdivisions so the edges get leaf buildup which ends up to lost balls.. sheesh!



    Nothing worse than losing a ball in the leaves.



    This time of the year I try to find a good performance ball without the extra tax. I like B330-S, I heard the new one was a better ball than the original which i play.
  • ColinMBColinMB Members Posts: 1,836
    Ok, I gotta ask this question considering what's been posted: Did the NIKE Power Distance Soft really do that well?



    I ask because my local Golftown is blowing them out. (we're talking the '07 model in the test right?)
  • vwgolfervwgolfer Members Posts: 1,962 ✭✭
    bladestriker wrote on Jan 7 2008, 08:26 PM:
    That magazine lost any credibility with me when they did there driver test. What a JOKE!! The G10 won hands down in length, dispersion and accuracy and they pick Titleist who actually did very poor in their test??? Data means nothing to them.



    That said, the Nike One Platinum is a great ball regardless of what they say.




    I agree. Also look how they listed the balls on Page 100. Basically to make it look like Titleist were the top picks they called them Achusnet/ Titleist balls.to make them appear at the top of the list. Does any one call them Achusnet balls??? This whole article looked like a advertorial for Titleist. Titleist ball selector was featured on 1 page. And the lead page only listed titleist balls.
    F8 attas cool
    F8 3w. attas 3
    F6 hybrid. vts silver
    Z565. recoil 95
    Pur wedges
    Piretti Matera
  • klpraklpra Members Posts: 641
    edited Jan 8, 2008 #40
    bladestriker wrote on Jan 7 2008, 08:26 PM:
    That magazine lost any credibility with me when they did there driver test. What a JOKE!! The G10 won hands down in length, dispersion and accuracy and they pick Titleist who actually did very poor in their test??? Data means nothing to them.



    That said, the Nike One Platinum is a great ball regardless of what they say.




    Great ball for the high swing speed player. Clearly not for the average Joe because he/she will not be able to compress it properly.
  • CydkarCydkar Members Posts: 125
    The Ignite and AD333 WERE tested but I don't have the mag. with me right now.
  • uncc18uncc18 Bridgestone!!! Members Posts: 390
    I was surprised that the B330 spun more than the B330-S off the wedge. I always thought the S was supposed to spin more, if nothing else because of it being softer.
  • dlnljldlnljl Members Posts: 159 ✭✭
    edited Jan 8, 2008 #43
    ColinMB wrote on Jan 8 2008, 01:41 PM:
    Ok, I gotta ask this question considering what's been posted: Did the NIKE Power Distance Soft really do that well?



    I ask because my local Golftown is blowing them out. (we're talking the '07 model in the test right?)




    It doesn't say what year model it is>

    Here are the numbers for the PD soft

    Driver 10.5Degree Superquad driver at 90 mph swing speed

    Distance 255.9. Longest Nike ball at that swing speed, Longest ball was Taylormade TP Black at 259.1 and shortest at 239.1 Nike Platinum

    Off a 56 degree Vokey spin Milled swung at 76 mph

    Spin was 8,888rpm listed in the medium spin category, Highest spinning ball was the Nike Platinum at 13,451 rpm, and lowest spin was Pinnacle Gold FX soft at 5,154 rpm



    Hope this helps

    I also was impressed at the raw data they provided in this article. It leaves it up to the individual golfer to try a narrowed down range of balls to try and pick the one they like best. They did not show a preference toward any one ball from what I read. As for my game the new e5+ sure likes a good ball for the price of it.
  • Young04Young04 Members Posts: 452
    would someone mind posting data for 105SS? i went to buy the magazine but it doesn't look like it has hit the newstands yet...thanks.
  • Veritas Veritas Members Posts: 629
    edited Jan 8, 2008 #45
    Driver 105ss

    _________________________spin_____total distance

    Bridgestone tour b330s_____2903.7_____287.7

    Callaway Touri____________2809.1_____289.6

    Nike One Platinum_________3516.4_____283.6

    Taylormade TP black_______2909.0_____289.1

    Titleist ProV1______________2880.1_____287.9

    Titleist ProV1x_____________2849.4_____290.0
  • e-dog9e-dog9 Members Posts: 633
    My copy of Golf Magazine arrived in the mail on Saturday. I immediately devoured the ball write-ups. This has to be one of their best pieces ever!



    This kind of reporting makes Golf Digest's Hot List look like so much cr*p.



    Spin rates off drivers and wedges, feel in addition to compression, distance off of drivers at various speeds. This is good work. Hats off to the folks at Golf Magazine.



    When reading the Hot Lists of past, I used to grimace and wonder just what the H*ll Buzz Factor was, and doubted the folks at Golf Digest even knew. GD Editors should take note, this Golf Magazine’s Ball review IS BUZZ!
  • bladestrikerbladestriker No. Cal.Members Posts: 1,177 ✭✭
    edited Jan 8, 2008 #47
    klpra wrote on Jan 8 2008, 10:59 AM:
    bladestriker wrote on Jan 7 2008, 08:26 PM:
    That magazine lost any credibility with me when they did there driver test. What a JOKE!! The G10 won hands down in length, dispersion and accuracy and they pick Titleist who actually did very poor in their test??? Data means nothing to them.



    That said, the Nike One Platinum is a great ball regardless of what they say.




    Great ball for the high swing speed player. Clearly not for the average Joe because he/she will not be able to compress it properly.




    What can the average Joe compress ?? What will they go for , a ball they can compress and spin or a ball that has distance numbers from a *test* like this. What kills me is these numbers can be skewed. If I swing 105 will I get these numbers ?? NO! Maybe I have a low spinning head and a low spinning shaft that is a good combo for the Platinum and I want the extra spin for iron shots and green control. These articles get the average Joe in a frenzy to try the hot ball from these test. Will the average Joe hit it on the screws most of the time to get these robot numbers??? I highly doubt it. These numbers come from a highly controlled test that doesn't have a lot of real world input to them.

    I suspect players would get alot more help on a monitor with their clubs and test different balls, that way their driver/shaft combo and their iron/wedge play can give them numbers that help them choose a ball.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    ‘16 M2 10.5º AD-DI 75X
    M2 tour 3 wood Kuro Kage 70x
    JPX 900 tour 4-PW PX lz 6.5
    Vokey 52º 56º 60º-PX lz 6.0
    Scotty Cameron AoP Newport 2 
    "I still wear full spikes so people know when I show up to the course, I am there to ball out."-Bigmean
  • bladerunner80871bladerunner80871 Members Posts: 123
    You obviously failed statistics and science dude...



    This IS a golfer hitting it on the screws with these PARTICULAR launch conditions!



    When I get fit on a launch monitor for clubs...the data is taken from center struck shots since that is ideally what I'm trying to achieve.



    By your logic ... when we get fit for woods or irons, or even balls for that matter ... we should only use the data for topped shots, slices, and duck hooks.



    We could have the results from a test where a bunch of dudes like you brought your own preferences and clubs to the range - and told us how much you liked the "FEEL" of your favorite ball. Stop crying.



    Hats off to Golf Magazine for taking the PROPER stride in helping everyday golfers get scientific data to help with their purchases!



    I have always played a premium ball. In fact I got fit on a launch monitor last summer...

    My swing speed...94mph

    Launch angle...16*

    Backspin... 2700 rpm



    I tested all the premium balls...guess what my results were?

    1. Taylormade TP Red

    2. Bridgestone B330-S

    3. Srixon ZUR-S

    **** close to this article!



    I went with the TP Red needless to say. But after reading this article - I went out and bought 2 boxes of the Burner TPs !!! Those numbers are AWESOME for a non-urethane ball. The spin rates were higher than either Callaway Tour-i !

    I'm done blowing $40/box on balls as long as this ball is on the market.



    PS...everyone should look at those spin rates as well as the distance leaders...those Nike PowerSofts are NOT what they're cracked up to be...the spin rates are too low - Who cares if they go sort of far? - ALSO...I'd like to add this for all the nike ho's crying about the Platinums results...This test just shows that the Platinum is a kick-a** ball if you have a higher than average swingspeed - so what if 90mph swings can't take advantage? PLAY WHAT WORKS.
  • tooflesstoofless Members Posts: 275
    As a disclaimer, I am somewhat of a Wilson Staff fanboi, but that being said, it was nice to see the 50 and especially the Zip balls post high numbers in both distance and spin for their price points. Just confirms for me what I already was feeling. I play the 50 and will definitely try the Zip ball @ $19/doz.
  • Veritas Veritas Members Posts: 629
    I went with the TP Red needless to say. But after reading this article - I went out and bought 2 boxes of the Burner TPs !!! Those numbers are AWESOME for a non-urethane ball. The spin rates were higher than either Callaway Tour-i !

    I'm done blowing $40/box on balls as long as this ball is on the market.






    Just a heads up, my understanding is that the burner TP is a urethane ball. Iothane has two types of urethane blended to make the ball more durable. Of course this ball is a great deal for a urethane ball. An even better deal are the maxfli fire tours on closeout, as they are pretty much the same ball except what seems like some minor tweaks.
  • turnbowmturnbowm Members Posts: 810
    klpra wrote on Jan 7 2008, 06:55 PM:
    Top 5 balls for distance at 90 mph swing speed. 137 MPH ball speed. 13.75 degree launch angle. 2900 rpm were:



    1. TM TP Black- 259.1

    2. Noodle+- 259.0

    3. TM TP Red- 258.6

    4. NXT Extreme- 257.5

    5. PD Soft- 255.9




    Those are pretty "healthy" distances for a 137mph ball speed. Wish that it was so.....
  • sirvinimsirvinim Members Posts: 208 ✭✭
    e-dog9 wrote on Jan 8 2008, 08:00 PM:
    My copy of Golf Magazine arrived in the mail on Saturday. I immediately devoured the ball write-ups. This has to be one of their best pieces ever!



    This kind of reporting makes Golf Digest's Hot List look like so much cr*p.



    Spin rates off drivers and wedges, feel in addition to compression, distance off of drivers at various speeds. This is good work. Hats off to the folks at Golf Magazine.



    When reading the Hot Lists of past, I used to grimace and wonder just what the H*ll Buzz Factor was, and doubted the folks at Golf Digest even knew. GD Editors should take note, this Golf Magazine’s Ball review IS BUZZ!




    I agree 100%. I don't think we'll see any "buzzzzzz factor" in next year's Hot List.
    Taylormade RBZ Tour Driver
    Taylormade SLDR 15 degree 3W
    Taylormade SLDR 18 degree 5W
    Mizuno MP-H5 21 degree 3 iron
    Mizuno MP-4 4-PW
    Cleveland CG12 54 degree
    Cleveland CG12 58 degree
  • bladestrikerbladestriker No. Cal.Members Posts: 1,177 ✭✭
    bladerunner80871 wrote on Jan 8 2008, 06:53 PM:
    You obviously failed statistics and science dude...



    This IS a golfer hitting it on the screws with these PARTICULAR launch conditions!



    When I get fit on a launch monitor for clubs...the data is taken from center struck shots since that is ideally what I'm trying to achieve.



    By your logic ... when we get fit for woods or irons, or even balls for that matter ... we should only use the data for topped shots, slices, and duck hooks.



    We could have the results from a test where a bunch of dudes like you brought your own preferences and clubs to the range - and told us how much you liked the "FEEL" of your favorite ball. Stop crying.



    Hats off to Golf Magazine for taking the PROPER stride in helping everyday golfers get scientific data to help with their purchases!



    I have always played a premium ball. In fact I got fit on a launch monitor last summer...

    My swing speed...94mph

    Launch angle...16*

    Backspin... 2700 rpm



    I tested all the premium balls...guess what my results were?

    1. Taylormade TP Red

    2. Bridgestone B330-S

    3. Srixon ZUR-S

    **** close to this article!



    I went with the TP Red needless to say. But after reading this article - I went out and bought 2 boxes of the Burner TPs !!! Those numbers are AWESOME for a non-urethane ball. The spin rates were higher than either Callaway Tour-i !

    I'm done blowing $40/box on balls as long as this ball is on the market.



    PS...everyone should look at those spin rates as well as the distance leaders...those Nike PowerSofts are NOT what they're cracked up to be...the spin rates are too low - Who cares if they go sort of far? - ALSO...I'd like to add this for all the nike ho's crying about the Platinums results...This test just shows that the Platinum is a kick-a** ball if you have a higher than average swingspeed - so what if 90mph swings can't take advantage? PLAY WHAT WORKS.




    Your choice of words in your opening sentence shows your lack of grammer and how to get your point across intelligently. Your "stop crying and Nike ho's" comment show your need to antagonize.



    If you read the whole article it was done with a 10.5 reg. flex driver and Callaway x20 irons, spin and launch characteristics are acheived by equipment that are not even close to what I use and probably the majority of players here. That is my argument on this topic. Callaways launch shots way higher than most irons and the driver set-up speaks for itself. The article is titled "Find The Ball That Fits You!" if I'm not mistaken, thats misleading. It should have been "Here is some data with this equipment hit by a robot".



    Look at my member # and join date, grow some whiskers before you start disrespecting me, try to debate respectfully, in turn you might get some respect back your way.
    ‘16 M2 10.5º AD-DI 75X
    M2 tour 3 wood Kuro Kage 70x
    JPX 900 tour 4-PW PX lz 6.5
    Vokey 52º 56º 60º-PX lz 6.0
    Scotty Cameron AoP Newport 2 
    "I still wear full spikes so people know when I show up to the course, I am there to ball out."-Bigmean
  • dansrixondansrixon Members Posts: 2,370 ✭✭
    Here is the issue I see with this test. With the vast technology and wide variety of golf balls that every manufacturer offers on the market for different swings, how can you test every ball with one swing speed/launch angle etc etc when each golf ball a manufacturer produces is designed for a different golfer? I think this is a great test for any golfer whos specs fall into this range, but for a major golf publication to publish a missleading article like this is dissappointing.



    Titliest is the #1 ball manufacturer so I will use them as an example. They have 5 golf balls currently on the market. If all 5 golf balls fit one swing, why make 5? This test puts the tour balls on the same playing field as the DT solo? It doesnt make sense.



    You wouldnt compare a Porsche to a Civic. Both are cars which a person drives, but both are designed with a different purpose, same thing applies to golf balls (to a lesser degree, but you get my point)



    What I would have dowe is had atleast 3 catogories, although this still wouldnt be perfect it would give a better representation. Do a slow swing speed test, an average SS test like the one they did, and then do a high SS test.



    The high compression balls results are a perfect example of how this test has failed. The Z-URC and Nike Platinum finished at the bottom of the list, which should not be a surprise since at the swing speeds tested are not fast enough to compress either of these golfballs to obtain their maximum performace. With testing under different conditions it would eliminate some of this confusion.



    One very positive thing about this article is hopefully it will discourage the average golfer from using hign end tour ball that will not help their game just because their favorite tour player plays that ball.
    Driver: 8.5 XXIO-X Black w/Miyazaki Kusala Black
    Fairway: Srixon F65 w/ Graphite Design ADMJ
    Hybrid: Srixon H65 16* w/Miyazaki Kaula
    Irons: Cleveland CBX w/X100 SL
    CBX 50, RTX3 RAW 54, 58 DG Spinner
    Putter: Cleveland 2135 #1
  • cb_golfercb_golfer "fine purveyor of skanky fades" Members Posts: 1,365
    turnbowm wrote on Jan 8 2008, 07:50 PM:
    klpra wrote on Jan 7 2008, 06:55 PM:
    Top 5 balls for distance at 90 mph swing speed. 137 MPH ball speed. 13.75 degree launch angle. 2900 rpm were:



    1. TM TP Black- 259.1

    2. Noodle+- 259.0

    3. TM TP Red- 258.6

    4. NXT Extreme- 257.5

    5. PD Soft- 255.9




    Those are pretty "healthy" distances for a 137mph ball speed. Wish that it was so.....






    What was the stimp reading on the fairways? By this logic, all the 105 swingers should be averaging 290+.
  • Bee-ManBee-Man Members Posts: 113
    All too funny...



    Ben Crenshaw said in an interview years ago that unless you were swinging it at 110mph or more - the premium balls were not going to significantly outperform the majority of mid priced balls.... and that they would be of little assistance to most club and social golfers.



    Golf Digest - the FOX news of the golfing world has made Gentle Ben a man of his word...as we all know him to be.



    I would have liked to have seen all balls hit at 80 ,90 and 100 - then whatever data accumulated would cover 95% of golfers....



    Problem is - that would likely show most premium balls are really no better than most mid priced balls.....and that would not suit the handful of manufacturers who seem to have the run of the mill at GD...



    Just my two cents...... image/drinks.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />
  • RockfishRockfish Banned Posts: 1,136
    bladestriker wrote on Jan 9 2008, 09:16 AM:
    bladerunner80871 wrote on Jan 8 2008, 06:53 PM:
    You obviously failed statistics and science dude...



    This IS a golfer hitting it on the screws with these PARTICULAR launch conditions!



    When I get fit on a launch monitor for clubs...the data is taken from center struck shots since that is ideally what I'm trying to achieve.



    By your logic ... when we get fit for woods or irons, or even balls for that matter ... we should only use the data for topped shots, slices, and duck hooks.



    We could have the results from a test where a bunch of dudes like you brought your own preferences and clubs to the range - and told us how much you liked the "FEEL" of your favorite ball. Stop crying.



    Hats off to Golf Magazine for taking the PROPER stride in helping everyday golfers get scientific data to help with their purchases!



    I have always played a premium ball. In fact I got fit on a launch monitor last summer...

    My swing speed...94mph

    Launch angle...16*

    Backspin... 2700 rpm



    I tested all the premium balls...guess what my results were?

    1. Taylormade TP Red

    2. Bridgestone B330-S

    3. Srixon ZUR-S

    **** close to this article!



    I went with the TP Red needless to say. But after reading this article - I went out and bought 2 boxes of the Burner TPs !!! Those numbers are AWESOME for a non-urethane ball. The spin rates were higher than either Callaway Tour-i !

    I'm done blowing $40/box on balls as long as this ball is on the market.



    PS...everyone should look at those spin rates as well as the distance leaders...those Nike PowerSofts are NOT what they're cracked up to be...the spin rates are too low - Who cares if they go sort of far? - ALSO...I'd like to add this for all the nike ho's crying about the Platinums results...This test just shows that the Platinum is a kick-a** ball if you have a higher than average swingspeed - so what if 90mph swings can't take advantage? PLAY WHAT WORKS.



    Your choice of words in your opening sentence shows your lack of grammer and how to get your point across intelligently. Your "stop crying and Nike ho's" comment show your need to antagonize.




    Does spelling count ? image/laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':cheesy:' />



    And how touchy we are defending our NOP,,,,,, very touching. image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':cheesy:' />


    If you read the whole article it was done with a 10.5 reg. flex driver and Callaway x20 irons, spin and launch characteristics are acheived by equipment that are not even close to what I use and probably the majority of players here. That is my argument on this topic. Callaways launch shots way higher than most irons and the driver set-up speaks for itself. The article is titled "Find The Ball That Fits You!" if I'm not mistaken, thats misleading. It should have been "Here is some data with this equipment hit by a robot".




    But you yourself said (referring to the magazine) "Data means nothing to them." Apparently it means nothing to you either.



    So because everybody plays different clubs, has different swings, different clubhead speeds, and so on, and so on, and so on,,,,,,,,,, the magazines shouldn't do ANY testing ? I mean really, what's your point ? image/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> The data sounds as though it was acheived very scientifically and accurately. If people MISINTERPRET the data or otherwise use it incorrectly, that's somehow the magazine's fault ???




    That said, the Nike One Platinum is a great ball regardless of what they say.




    Well now, good for you. YOU found the ball YOU like best. Why do you have a problem with others (at least somewhat) relying on a magazine test to guide them to some possibilities ? Maybe you should just ignore the article (and the thread) ???




    Look at my member # and join date, grow some whiskers before you start disrespecting me, try to debate respectfully, in turn you might get some respect back your way.




    image/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':cheesy:' /> Oy. I think someone needs to get over their bad self. Your member number and join date mean what exactly ? That you found the site before he did !!! I mean REALLY now !!! How old are you again ? image/laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':cheesy:' />



    And frankly, weren't YOU trying to "antagonize" with your initial post here ???



    "That magazine lost any credibility with me when they did there driver test. What a JOKE!! The G10 won hands down in length, dispersion and accuracy and they pick Titleist who actually did very poor in their test??? Data means nothing to them."



    That doesn't sound very "respectful" to ME. Or doesn't it count because it was directed towards a magazine rather than another person ?



    Try not to take yourself too seriously, OK ? image/good.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':cheesy:' />



    Peace image/drinks.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':cheesy:' />
  • Veritas Veritas Members Posts: 629
    cb_golfer wrote on Jan 9 2008, 11:35 AM:
    turnbowm wrote on Jan 8 2008, 07:50 PM:
    klpra wrote on Jan 7 2008, 06:55 PM:
    Top 5 balls for distance at 90 mph swing speed. 137 MPH ball speed. 13.75 degree launch angle. 2900 rpm were:



    1. TM TP Black- 259.1

    2. Noodle+- 259.0

    3. TM TP Red- 258.6

    4. NXT Extreme- 257.5

    5. PD Soft- 255.9




    Those are pretty "healthy" distances for a 137mph ball speed. Wish that it was so.....






    What was the stimp reading on the fairways? By this logic, all the 105 swingers should be averaging 290+.




    Well the results of the 105 swing speed test did show right around 290 averages. Just sounds like the fairways were pretty hard and fast.
  • jswjrjswjr Members Posts: 314 ✭✭
    This test that Golf Mag has done is probably the best effort anyone has ever done,IMO !



    No it is not perfect but I think it will be a help for MOST golfers.



    I'm suprised that so many people want to nit pick and find fault with the test.



    On second thought I take that back. I should have know that a small percentage of people would just have to put the test down.
    Ping 400 LST 10*
    K15 3 & 5 wood
    Ping ie 1  4-GW
    Ping M/B 54* & 60* wedges
    G5 Craz-e putter
    Titleist DT TruSoft
  • ColinMBColinMB Members Posts: 1,836
    Thanks for the info so far guys. I appreciate it. It is KILLING me that my issue hasn't arrived yet.



    One thing I am enjoying is that some of my suspicions have been getting confirmed except there's one puzzler to me. Where is the Nike One Black? A lot of GolfWRX's use it and I haven't heard boo about it.
  • mcbush25mcbush25 Members Posts: 2,040 ✭✭
    bladestriker wrote on Jan 9 2008, 08:16 AM:
    bladerunner80871 wrote on Jan 8 2008, 06:53 PM:
    You obviously failed statistics and science dude...



    This IS a golfer hitting it on the screws with these PARTICULAR launch conditions!



    When I get fit on a launch monitor for clubs...the data is taken from center struck shots since that is ideally what I'm trying to achieve.



    By your logic ... when we get fit for woods or irons, or even balls for that matter ... we should only use the data for topped shots, slices, and duck hooks.



    We could have the results from a test where a bunch of dudes like you brought your own preferences and clubs to the range - and told us how much you liked the "FEEL" of your favorite ball. Stop crying.



    Hats off to Golf Magazine for taking the PROPER stride in helping everyday golfers get scientific data to help with their purchases!



    I have always played a premium ball. In fact I got fit on a launch monitor last summer...

    My swing speed...94mph

    Launch angle...16*

    Backspin... 2700 rpm



    I tested all the premium balls...guess what my results were?

    1. Taylormade TP Red

    2. Bridgestone B330-S

    3. Srixon ZUR-S

    **** close to this article!



    I went with the TP Red needless to say. But after reading this article - I went out and bought 2 boxes of the Burner TPs !!! Those numbers are AWESOME for a non-urethane ball. The spin rates were higher than either Callaway Tour-i !

    I'm done blowing $40/box on balls as long as this ball is on the market.



    PS...everyone should look at those spin rates as well as the distance leaders...those Nike PowerSofts are NOT what they're cracked up to be...the spin rates are too low - Who cares if they go sort of far? - ALSO...I'd like to add this for all the nike ho's crying about the Platinums results...This test just shows that the Platinum is a kick-a** ball if you have a higher than average swingspeed - so what if 90mph swings can't take advantage? PLAY WHAT WORKS.




    Your choice of words in your opening sentence shows your lack of grammer and how to get your point across intelligently. Your "stop crying and Nike ho's" comment show your need to antagonize.



    If you read the whole article it was done with a 10.5 reg. flex driver and Callaway x20 irons, spin and launch characteristics are acheived by equipment that are not even close to what I use and probably the majority of players here. That is my argument on this topic. Callaways launch shots way higher than most irons and the driver set-up speaks for itself. The article is titled "Find The Ball That Fits You!" if I'm not mistaken, thats misleading. It should have been "Here is some data with this equipment hit by a robot".



    Look at my member # and join date, grow some whiskers before you start disrespecting me, try to debate respectfully, in turn you might get some respect back your way.




    I, quite frankly, thought the article was great. I am glad that they did the test with a standard set of clubs instead of changing clubs up throughout the whole process. The article provides the readers with good information that most readers wouldn't get if someone didn't give it to them. I know you or I might not use the clubs that they used in test, but it provides you fairly accurate comparison in spin rates for the balls.
Sign In or Register to comment.