New Chrome Soft and Chrome Soft X

1246714

Comments

  • tbombtbomb Wheel, Snipe, Party - Gongshow Hockey Members Posts: 2,372 ClubWRX


    I like the Chrome Soft but will think twice if the price is too high. If I have to pay a ProV price, I might as well get a ProV.




    The biggest downside of the ProV1/X in my mind is that the ball is worn out after 9/18 holes. The 17 Chrome soft ball was made out of a white resin (iirc) that actual made the ball whiter after use.



    Everyone that is saying, if it costs X amount, I'm playing a Titleist is foolish. If you will pay for a premium ball, then play the premium ball that is best for you.
  • denvergolfdenvergolf Members Posts: 1,392 ✭✭
    nohny noke wrote:

    Hawkeye77 wrote:


    Didn't like the X, like the Tru Vis black and yellow a lot, especially when putting. BUT I played the new Pro V1 last summer as well and absolutely loved it. I found it a better wind ball than the Tru Vis and liked it better off the tee, but those Tru Vis balls combined with my old Legacy Black Callaways were absolute spin machines from the fairway and stopped deader than dead.


    They’re actually trying to sell the balls, not offer them up 3 for 1 like tickets in Ames image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Cally needs to make a Cardinal and Gold Tru Vis.



    😉
    Ping G410 - 9*, HZRDUS Black 75-6.5 handcrafted
    Ping G410 - 14.5* LST
    TaylorMade P790 UDI, 17*, Project X Hzrdus Black 85 - 6.5
    TaylorMade P760, 4-W, KBS DG Tour Issue X100
    Titleist Vokey SM7 Raw 50-F
    Cleveland RTX 4, 56-mid and 60-low
    Titleist Cameron Tour Rat 1-M or NP2 Timeless
    2019 TM TP5x
  • campioncampion 3-jack-king Members Posts: 652
    Has anyone hit this ball on Trackman vs other premium balls yet? Or if you have and can’t talk about it I understand .. when is the expected release date?
  • Golf4liferGolf4lifer Members Posts: 498 ✭✭
    tbomb wrote:



    I like the Chrome Soft but will think twice if the price is too high. If I have to pay a ProV price, I might as well get a ProV.




    The biggest downside of the ProV1/X in my mind is that the ball is worn out after 9/18 holes. The 17 Chrome soft ball was made out of a white resin (iirc) that actual made the ball whiter after use.



    Everyone that is saying, if it costs X amount, I'm playing a Titleist is foolish. If you will pay for a premium ball, then play the premium ball that is best for you.




    For me there was no real difference between the CSX and the TP5 so cost became the deciding factor. If that is foolish so be it. I think for most the difference in premium balls is small so cost becomes the main factor. If there is no perceived value in the CSX, then why not play the proven ball?
  • EHolmEHolm Members Posts: 341
    campion wrote:


    Has anyone hit this ball on Trackman vs other premium balls yet? Or if you have and can’t talk about it I understand .. when is the expected release date?


    The guys that claim so and so higher ball speed must have. I’m calling bs on anyone seeing a few mph higher ball speed on course
    PXG 0811X 7.5° Veylix Rome 888 X
    PXG 0341X 3W 13.5° Veylix Rome 888 X
    TaylorMade P790 2i UDI Veylix Rome 988 X
    TaylorMade P770 4-7 KBS $-taper black 130 X
    TaylorMade P750 8-PW KBS $-taper black 130 X
    Titleist SM7 Jet black 50-12F KBS Tour custom white X
    Titleist SM7 Jet black 56-10M KBS Tour custom white S
    Titleist SM7 Jet black 62-06L KBS Tour custom white S
    Odyssey Lucky 777 SB
  • NokeNoke Posts: 2,082 ✭✭
    denvergolf wrote:

    nohny noke wrote:

    Hawkeye77 wrote:


    Didn't like the X, like the Tru Vis black and yellow a lot, especially when putting. BUT I played the new Pro V1 last summer as well and absolutely loved it. I found it a better wind ball than the Tru Vis and liked it better off the tee, but those Tru Vis balls combined with my old Legacy Black Callaways were absolute spin machines from the fairway and stopped deader than dead.


    They’re actually trying to sell the balls, not offer them up 3 for 1 like tickets in Ames image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Cally needs to make a Cardinal and Gold Tru Vis.



    😉





    I set myself up for that one.



    Did Hawkeye's post get moderated for being too anti-Cyclone? What happened there? Lol



    Is all in good fun.
  • Lancj1Lancj1 Posts: 883 ClubWRX
    Some of the posts re ball costs. I don't understand it, but I do it. Think nothing of getting a new three wood (£220), feel severely broken when a £4.00 ball flies into the lake yet carefree when its a £2.00 ball....



    If balls were free I bet we would all play Prov's you know.....
    G Max Driver, Tour 65 Stiff
    G400 3 & 5 Woods Alta CB Reg
    G400 2,3,4,5 Hybrids Alta CB Reg
    G410 Irons, 6-U, Green Dot, Alta CB Reg + 1/2"
    Glide Stealth 54 (SS) & 58 (WS) Green Dot, Alta CB Reg + 1/2"
    Ping Sigma 2 Valor, Stealth

    Disclaimer*

    I'm a handicap golfer in my 50's. Any opinions I have about golf equipment or professional golfers or the game in general should be taken as seriously as you would the opinions of a random guy in the fourball ahead of you who just shot 92 but is usually better than that.
  • wldchld22wldchld22 Members Posts: 3,323 ✭✭
    HISPL wrote:

    tbomb wrote:


    Graphene. That's why the ball is so much better. Someone else already said, a sheet of the stuff would cover a football field and weigh as much as a dime.



    They have mixed this super strong material into the cover of the ball, and made it urethane. Why is that so great? Because the cover of the ball is the thinnest possible. Why does that matter? Because the thinner cover creates that 2-3 MPH of ball speed everyone is talking about.



    the new 18 ball will be long and soft and worth every penny.



    IMO Callaway should have dropped the Chrome soft name with this ball because it's so much better it can't even be compared to the 17 ball. Rock is brilliant and Callaway does not want to be #2 in anything...




    This is pretty much it, I was under the impression that the graphene was in the core not the cover but otherwise I agree with everything else.




    I heard graphene was the secret sauce; but nobody was telling me where it was.



    Graphene is very light; but very stiff. It's been used in the tennis industry for years so I'm really familiar with it.



    If Ishi had input I would imagine he is going after what they did with the RZN material where they moved the MOI towards the outside of the ball. Using Graphene near the core because of the lightweight properties makes sense there.



    I hope it's not in the cover. Despite being light and stiff; that might make for a clicky and harsh cover; but it might also make it more resilient.
  • wldchld22wldchld22 Members Posts: 3,323 ✭✭
    EHolm wrote:

    campion wrote:


    Has anyone hit this ball on Trackman vs other premium balls yet? Or if you have and can’t talk about it I understand .. when is the expected release date?


    The guys that claim so and so higher ball speed must have. I’m calling bs on anyone seeing a few mph higher ball speed on course




    I didn't hear ball speeds, but actual distance. My source hit against a competitor with the same club on the same trackman and it was a really big difference for him. Can't wait to test for myself. Don't want to put too much out there to get him in trouble and it's almost unbelievable in terms of distance. peak vs peak.
  • nsxguynsxguy Just anudder user FloridaMembers Posts: 5,274 ✭✭
    bogeypro wrote:

    groach wrote:


    I'm confused why people are so upset over $5? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your income, budget, etc. Hear me out.



    A new dozen PV1/PV1x costs $47.99 @ Dicks right now online. If the CS/CSX go from $39.99 to $44.99, they are still cheaper. Not as cheap, but still cheaper. Not to mention if this new ball costs more to make in terms of this new material, better believe that price is getting passed to consumers.



    My point is this - if you like a ball, and it truly performs for you, isn't paying another .42c per ball worth it? From a budget standpoint, that's one less coffee per month, or skipping one drive-thru meal. Your other option is to buy the 2017 versions at the discounted price. There will still be tons of them available for a while.




    Because under $40 was a good price. Over $40 is not a good value to me. I'm not a pro, the balls in the low to mid $30 price range work good enough for my game and I'm a plus handicap. I've never hit a mid price ball and thought, I'm really held back by this $35 ball...




    This always kills me. 42 CENTS per round. As a + handicap I assume you don't lose many. Or do you break out a fresh ball every 3 holes ? (Of course even then it'd only be an additional $2.50 per round). I can almost understand the high handicapper that loses 2 or 3 ball per round playing a rock hard cheapie but,,,,,,,,,,,



    With all the guys who spend $75 on a golf shirt only to wear it 4 or 5 times before they won't wear it again because they have newer and brighter ones ($15-$18 PER round)



    and the guys who spend $400 on a driver only to use it for 15 rounds or so and sell it for $250 if they're lucky ($10 PER round)



    or the guys who spend $150-$200 for a pair of shoes they wear maybe 20 times and then throw them away ($7-$10 PER round),



    or buying a set of irons for $1000 that a year or less later, say about 30 rounds, you can only get $400 for ($20 PER round),



    not to mention green fees of upwards of $30 PER round............. oops.



    It absolutely astonishes me that ANYBODY would balk at paying an additional 42 CENTS per round for the best golf ball for their game.



    Makes ZERO sense to me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,



    mind-blown.jpg

    ANY SITE GUIDANCE I OFFER, UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE, IS REFERRING TO THE "DESKTOP/FULL" VERSION

    Callaway Epic 10.5 Project X Hzrdus Yellow 63 gr, 6.0
    Adams A12 Pro hybrids, 16*, 20*, 23*, Aldila VS Proto Stiff
    Titleist 716 AP-1, 5-PW, DGS300
    Cleveland RTX-3 50*, 56*, 64 DGS300

    Taylormade Spidex-X Blue/single white line (Today - always subject to change)
    Titleist AVX
  • wldchld22wldchld22 Members Posts: 3,323 ✭✭
    Lancj1 wrote:


    Some of the posts re ball costs. I don't understand it, but I do it. Think nothing of getting a new three wood (£220), feel severely broken when a £4.00 ball flies into the lake yet carefree when its a £2.00 ball....



    If balls were free I bet we would all play Prov's you know.....




    Nah man. If balls were free mate and no one had brand loyalty we would be playing the balls that test better. ProV is a great ball do not get me wrong but there are independent tests that show other balls beat in certain categories.



    I also have not been a fan since 2012 of the ProV and every year it has failed to be my best ball.
  • HISPLHISPL Members Posts: 3,068
    nsxguy wrote:

    bogeypro wrote:

    groach wrote:


    I'm confused why people are so upset over $5? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your income, budget, etc. Hear me out.



    A new dozen PV1/PV1x costs $47.99 @ Dicks right now online. If the CS/CSX go from $39.99 to $44.99, they are still cheaper. Not as cheap, but still cheaper. Not to mention if this new ball costs more to make in terms of this new material, better believe that price is getting passed to consumers.



    My point is this - if you like a ball, and it truly performs for you, isn't paying another .42c per ball worth it? From a budget standpoint, that's one less coffee per month, or skipping one drive-thru meal. Your other option is to buy the 2017 versions at the discounted price. There will still be tons of them available for a while.




    Because under $40 was a good price. Over $40 is not a good value to me. I'm not a pro, the balls in the low to mid $30 price range work good enough for my game and I'm a plus handicap. I've never hit a mid price ball and thought, I'm really held back by this $35 ball...




    This always kills me. 42 CENTS per round. As a + handicap I assume you don't lose many. Or do you break out a fresh ball every 3 holes ? (Of course even then it'd only be an additional $2.50 per round). I can almost understand the high handicapper that loses 2 or 3 ball per round playing a rock hard cheapie but,,,,,,,,,,,



    With all the guys who spend $75 on a golf shirt only to wear it 4 or 5 times before they won't wear it again because they have newer and brighter ones ($15-$18 PER round)



    and the guys who spend $400 on a driver only to use it for 15 rounds or so and sell it for $250 if they're lucky ($10 PER round)



    or the guys who spend $150-$200 for a pair of shoes they wear maybe 20 times and then throw them away ($7-$10 PER round),



    or buying a set of irons for $1000 that a year or less later, say about 30 rounds, you can only get $400 for ($20 PER round),



    not to mention green fees of upwards of $30 PER round............. oops.



    It absolutely astonishes me that ANYBODY would balk at paying an additional 42 CENTS per round for the best golf ball for their game.



    Makes ZERO sense to me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,



    mind-blown.jpg




    Great post! I agree 100%
  • tbombtbomb Wheel, Snipe, Party - Gongshow Hockey Members Posts: 2,372 ClubWRX
    Golf4lifer wrote:

    tbomb wrote:



    I like the Chrome Soft but will think twice if the price is too high. If I have to pay a ProV price, I might as well get a ProV.




    The biggest downside of the ProV1/X in my mind is that the ball is worn out after 9/18 holes. The 17 Chrome soft ball was made out of a white resin (iirc) that actual made the ball whiter after use.



    Everyone that is saying, if it costs X amount, I'm playing a Titleist is foolish. If you will pay for a premium ball, then play the premium ball that is best for you.




    For me there was no real difference between the CSX and the TP5 so cost became the deciding factor. If that is foolish so be it. I think for most the difference in premium balls is small so cost becomes the main factor. If there is no perceived value in the CSX, then why not play the proven ball?




    That's absolutely a fair statement. I feel like almost all the premium balls are different in their own way, so that's why I said play the best ball.



    Ala Graphene in the cover, it is not clicky. I was able to play 2 rounds with the new ball before the course closed for the season. Golf Balls don't really get me excited, but I'm beyond stoked to play this new ball.
  • Golf4liferGolf4lifer Members Posts: 498 ✭✭
    tbomb wrote:

    Golf4lifer wrote:

    tbomb wrote:



    I like the Chrome Soft but will think twice if the price is too high. If I have to pay a ProV price, I might as well get a ProV.




    The biggest downside of the ProV1/X in my mind is that the ball is worn out after 9/18 holes. The 17 Chrome soft ball was made out of a white resin (iirc) that actual made the ball whiter after use.



    Everyone that is saying, if it costs X amount, I'm playing a Titleist is foolish. If you will pay for a premium ball, then play the premium ball that is best for you.




    For me there was no real difference between the CSX and the TP5 so cost became the deciding factor. If that is foolish so be it. I think for most the difference in premium balls is small so cost becomes the main factor. If there is no perceived value in the CSX, then why not play the proven ball?




    That's absolutely a fair statement. I feel like almost all the premium balls are different in their own way, so that's why I said play the best ball.



    Ala Graphene in the cover, it is not clicky. I was able to play 2 rounds with the new ball before the course closed for the season. Golf Balls don't really get me excited, but I'm beyond stoked to play this new ball.




    The way people are talking about this ball, it may be worth the price increase. Cant wait to test it.
  • HISPLHISPL Members Posts: 3,068
    Ok, so a few people have been asking me how the graphene works in improving the ball.



    Graphene is used in the core to make it larger and lighter, the mantle and cover as far as I am aware do not use it.



    What this does is greatly increases the MOI of the ball and long story short it reduces spin rate on longer shots making the ball “straighter”.



    What this also does is reduces the decay of ball speed too. As spin rates increase the decay of ball speed does too.

    Lower decay rates of ball speed offer greater landing ball speeds for more roll out and the ball is harder to “knock off line” in the wind.



    This technology allows for the use of a much softer cover, on shots where the spin loft is higher this is of great benefit as the friction coefficient of the cover is a major contributing factor to the overall spin rate.



    So what we end up with is a ball that is straighter on long shots, doesn’t get affected by the wind as much, is longer due to better roll out and on chips, bunker shots, pitch shots/approaches spins more.



    At least that is my theory having been explained how the tech is implemented into the ball and then using my basic physics knowledge to fill in some blanks.



    The way the ball behaves on the course seems to fit my hypothesis too, it is by far the best ball I have played!
  • bcflyguy1bcflyguy1 Enjoying my coffee... Members Posts: 3,012 ✭✭
    HISPL wrote:


    Ok, so a few people have been asking me how the graphene works in improving the ball.



    Graphene is used in the core to make it larger and lighter, the mantle and cover as far as I am aware do not use it.



    What this does is greatly increases the MOI of the ball and long story short it reduces spin rate on longer shots making the ball "straighter".



    What this also does is reduces the decay of ball speed too. As spin rates increase the decay of ball speed does too.

    Lower decay rates of ball speed offer greater landing ball speeds for more roll out and the ball is harder to "knock off line" in the wind.



    This technology allows for the use of a much softer cover, on shots where the spin loft is higher this is of great benefit as the friction coefficient of the cover is a major contributing factor to the overall spin rate.



    So what we end up with is a ball that is straighter on long shots, doesn't get affected by the wind as much, is longer due to better roll out and on chips, bunker shots, pitch shots/approaches spins more.



    At least that is my theory having been explained how the tech is implemented into the ball and then using my basic physics knowledge to fill in some blanks.



    The way the ball behaves on the course seems to fit my hypothesis too, it is by far the best ball I have played!




    As I suspected, Rock Ishii brought the same concepts of the Nike RZN Tour balls to this version of CS/CSX.



    Didn't know the tech story at the time, but I have played a sleeve of the '18 CSX and I think Callaway finally has FINALLY gotten it right since going the Chrome Soft direction. My biggest gripe with the previous versions of CS (and to a lesser extent CSX) was unpredictable spin performance and squirrely distance control. That is not the case with the '18 version of the CSX. Was testing in relatively cold and wet conditions so I can't speak to any noticeable distance gains in the long game, but what I did see was consistently outstanding performance in all aspects. Very strong and tight ball flight that fights the wind well, no clicky feel that previous Callaway tour balls were notorious for, exceptional short game spin, and biggest key being CONSISTENT and predictable trajectory and distance control on all kinds of approach shots. I was a huge fan of the RZN Tour Platinum before Nike folded up their tent, and the '18 CSX really does remind me of that.
    Never forget that the luxury of being
    wrong is not enough to make you right.
    WITB Link
  • I use Nike RZN Tour Platinum and have 7 boxes still to use but i will buy a box of the chrome soft 2018 to test and see if it outperforms my nike balls as going forward i need a new ball when my stock runs out.



    As far as people talking about more distance from the 2018 ball, not everyone knows this but Nike reverse engineered the USGA ball testing machine so the 2016 ball could be at 99.9% of the distance limit so if Rock took this with him to Callaway this could be why the new ball is a few yards longer.
    Taylormade M6 D'Type Driver (graphite design ad-mj-5 shaft)
    Taylormade M6 D'Type 3 Wood (mrc tensei orange shaft)
    Taylormade M6 D'Type 5 Wood (mrc tensei orange shaft)
    Taylormade M6 D'Type 7 Wood (mrc tensei orange shaft)
    Taylormade MCGB Irons 5-PW (kbs c-taper lite shafts)
    Cleveland CBX Wedges 48, 54 & 60 (kbs hi-rev 2.0 shafts)
    Taylormade Spider X Putter
    Taylormade TP5X (2019) Ball
    Taylormade Golf Bag
    Taylormade Hat, Nike Glove, Shoes and Clothes
  • campioncampion 3-jack-king Members Posts: 652
    HISPL wrote:


    Ok, so a few people have been asking me how the graphene works in improving the ball.



    Graphene is used in the core to make it larger and lighter, the mantle and cover as far as I am aware do not use it.



    What this does is greatly increases the MOI of the ball and long story short it reduces spin rate on longer shots making the ball “straighter”.



    What this also does is reduces the decay of ball speed too. As spin rates increase the decay of ball speed does too.

    Lower decay rates of ball speed offer greater landing ball speeds for more roll out and the ball is harder to “knock off line” in the wind.



    This technology allows for the use of a much softer cover, on shots where the spin loft is higher this is of great benefit as the friction coefficient of the cover is a major contributing factor to the overall spin rate.



    So what we end up with is a ball that is straighter on long shots, doesn’t get affected by the wind as much, is longer due to better roll out and on chips, bunker shots, pitch shots/approaches spins more.



    At least that is my theory having been explained how the tech is implemented into the ball and then using my basic physics knowledge to fill in some blanks.



    The way the ball behaves on the course seems to fit my hypothesis too, it is by far the best ball I have played!




    Awesome thanks for the info
  • Belmont148Belmont148 Members Posts: 1,487 ✭✭
    HISPL wrote:

    nsxguy wrote:

    bogeypro wrote:

    groach wrote:


    I'm confused why people are so upset over $5? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your income, budget, etc. Hear me out.



    A new dozen PV1/PV1x costs $47.99 @ Dicks right now online. If the CS/CSX go from $39.99 to $44.99, they are still cheaper. Not as cheap, but still cheaper. Not to mention if this new ball costs more to make in terms of this new material, better believe that price is getting passed to consumers.



    My point is this - if you like a ball, and it truly performs for you, isn't paying another .42c per ball worth it? From a budget standpoint, that's one less coffee per month, or skipping one drive-thru meal. Your other option is to buy the 2017 versions at the discounted price. There will still be tons of them available for a while.




    Because under $40 was a good price. Over $40 is not a good value to me. I'm not a pro, the balls in the low to mid $30 price range work good enough for my game and I'm a plus handicap. I've never hit a mid price ball and thought, I'm really held back by this $35 ball...




    This always kills me. 42 CENTS per round. As a + handicap I assume you don't lose many. Or do you break out a fresh ball every 3 holes ? (Of course even then it'd only be an additional $2.50 per round). I can almost understand the high handicapper that loses 2 or 3 ball per round playing a rock hard cheapie but,,,,,,,,,,,



    With all the guys who spend $75 on a golf shirt only to wear it 4 or 5 times before they won't wear it again because they have newer and brighter ones ($15-$18 PER round)



    and the guys who spend $400 on a driver only to use it for 15 rounds or so and sell it for $250 if they're lucky ($10 PER round)



    or the guys who spend $150-$200 for a pair of shoes they wear maybe 20 times and then throw them away ($7-$10 PER round),



    or buying a set of irons for $1000 that a year or less later, say about 30 rounds, you can only get $400 for ($20 PER round),



    not to mention green fees of upwards of $30 PER round............. oops.



    It absolutely astonishes me that ANYBODY would balk at paying an additional 42 CENTS per round for the best golf ball for their game.



    Makes ZERO sense to me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,



    mind-blown.jpg




    Great post! I agree 100%




    Everyone is different. If you don't lose balls, it's a no brainer. I am getting to the point where I lose about 1 ball a round or less, but when I am playing with the family or in the summer when it is busy I will abandon a search much quicker for the sake of pace of play and to keep my kids moving along. Paying $4 a ball then is ridiculous as I know I will go through a sleeve or more just because of the scenario.



    I have 5 dozen CS currently and the way this ball performs 100 yds. in I don't plan to change anytime soon but will give the new ones a try when these are gone. For the days when I feel like I can keep it in play, and not a course with crazy wasteland and yards with fences that I may not be able to jump in to retrieve, I will be playing the CS. If it is a tough course and/or playing with family, I would rather keep it fun and not stress out about losing a $4 ball.



    In all honesty, I think I like the Truvis more than the actual ball anyway. If they released a urethane cover ball in Truvis for amateurs, basically just sell the old Chromesoft for $29.99 it would be a home run just like Srixon did.
    Current Bag:

    G400 SFT 10* Aldila Rogue 125 Silver 60TS
    F8+ 4W- HZRDUS Black 75 Stiff
    Ping G25 3H and 4H Stock R Flex
    Ping I200 5-UW Project X LZ 5.5
    Glide Stealth 54SS and 58ES Project X LZ 5.5
    Scotty Studio Stainless Newport 2
  • HISPLHISPL Members Posts: 3,068
    Belmont148 wrote:

    HISPL wrote:

    nsxguy wrote:

    bogeypro wrote:

    groach wrote:


    I'm confused why people are so upset over $5? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your income, budget, etc. Hear me out.



    A new dozen PV1/PV1x costs $47.99 @ Dicks right now online. If the CS/CSX go from $39.99 to $44.99, they are still cheaper. Not as cheap, but still cheaper. Not to mention if this new ball costs more to make in terms of this new material, better believe that price is getting passed to consumers.



    My point is this - if you like a ball, and it truly performs for you, isn't paying another .42c per ball worth it? From a budget standpoint, that's one less coffee per month, or skipping one drive-thru meal. Your other option is to buy the 2017 versions at the discounted price. There will still be tons of them available for a while.




    Because under $40 was a good price. Over $40 is not a good value to me. I'm not a pro, the balls in the low to mid $30 price range work good enough for my game and I'm a plus handicap. I've never hit a mid price ball and thought, I'm really held back by this $35 ball...




    This always kills me. 42 CENTS per round. As a + handicap I assume you don't lose many. Or do you break out a fresh ball every 3 holes ? (Of course even then it'd only be an additional $2.50 per round). I can almost understand the high handicapper that loses 2 or 3 ball per round playing a rock hard cheapie but,,,,,,,,,,,



    With all the guys who spend $75 on a golf shirt only to wear it 4 or 5 times before they won't wear it again because they have newer and brighter ones ($15-$18 PER round)



    and the guys who spend $400 on a driver only to use it for 15 rounds or so and sell it for $250 if they're lucky ($10 PER round)



    or the guys who spend $150-$200 for a pair of shoes they wear maybe 20 times and then throw them away ($7-$10 PER round),



    or buying a set of irons for $1000 that a year or less later, say about 30 rounds, you can only get $400 for ($20 PER round),



    not to mention green fees of upwards of $30 PER round............. oops.



    It absolutely astonishes me that ANYBODY would balk at paying an additional 42 CENTS per round for the best golf ball for their game.



    Makes ZERO sense to me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,



    mind-blown.jpg




    Great post! I agree 100%




    Everyone is different. If you don't lose balls, it's a no brainer. I am getting to the point where I lose about 1 ball a round or less, but when I am playing with the family or in the summer when it is busy I will abandon a search much quicker for the sake of pace of play and to keep my kids moving along. Paying $4 a ball then is ridiculous as I know I will go through a sleeve or more just because of the scenario.



    I have 5 dozen CS currently and the way this ball performs 100 yds. in I don't plan to change anytime soon but will give the new ones a try when these are gone. For the days when I feel like I can keep it in play, and not a course with crazy wasteland and yards with fences that I may not be able to jump in to retrieve, I will be playing the CS. If it is a tough course and/or playing with family, I would rather keep it fun and not stress out about losing a $4 ball.



    In all honesty, I think I like the Truvis more than the actual ball anyway. If they released a urethane cover ball in Truvis for amateurs, basically just sell the old Chromesoft for $29.99 it would be a home run just like Srixon did.




    Each to their own, I guess for me for the amount that I spend on golf spending even $12-15 a round (Needing three balls for would be unusual but possible) isn’t a major concern for me.



    I use a new ball every round, I keep them to use for practice afterwards so my shag bag stays healthy.
  • campioncampion 3-jack-king Members Posts: 652
    When do they officially release info on this ball, does anyone know?
  • EHolmEHolm Members Posts: 341
    Ball is set for march release in Europe
    PXG 0811X 7.5° Veylix Rome 888 X
    PXG 0341X 3W 13.5° Veylix Rome 888 X
    TaylorMade P790 2i UDI Veylix Rome 988 X
    TaylorMade P770 4-7 KBS $-taper black 130 X
    TaylorMade P750 8-PW KBS $-taper black 130 X
    Titleist SM7 Jet black 50-12F KBS Tour custom white X
    Titleist SM7 Jet black 56-10M KBS Tour custom white S
    Titleist SM7 Jet black 62-06L KBS Tour custom white S
    Odyssey Lucky 777 SB
  • wldchld22wldchld22 Members Posts: 3,323 ✭✭
    Thank @HISPL I knew there was no way graphene was in the cover. A lighter firmer core makes sense. If goes with the Ishi way of thinking and if this is a better version of RZN then we have a definite winner. Loved rzn platinum feel!
  • StanksStanks Everything I post is confrontational Members Posts: 1,145 ✭✭
    It just needs microdimples and truvis
  • BubbBubb Members Posts: 1,301 ✭✭
    I'm going back to the Q Star Tour.
  • erock9174erock9174 North Canton, OHMembers Posts: 3,928 ✭✭
    How’s the launch and trajectory with this ball? Looking for a high flying Urethane but they always fly lower than the low compression 2 pc balls that I normally play cause I need height on my shots. Short knocker that needs launch.

    Driver: Ping Rhapsody 16*
    FW: Ping G400 SFT 5w
    Hybrids: Exotics XRail 23*/26*
    Irons: Ping G700 6-UW
    Wedges: Cleveland CBX 56*/60* - Callaway Sure Out 64*
    Putter: Ping Sigma G Tyne H


  • Travis DuckroTravis Duckro Members Posts: 286 ✭✭
    nsxguy wrote:

    bogeypro wrote:

    groach wrote:


    I'm confused why people are so upset over $5? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your income, budget, etc. Hear me out.



    A new dozen PV1/PV1x costs $47.99 @ Dicks right now online. If the CS/CSX go from $39.99 to $44.99, they are still cheaper. Not as cheap, but still cheaper. Not to mention if this new ball costs more to make in terms of this new material, better believe that price is getting passed to consumers.



    My point is this - if you like a ball, and it truly performs for you, isn't paying another .42c per ball worth it? From a budget standpoint, that's one less coffee per month, or skipping one drive-thru meal. Your other option is to buy the 2017 versions at the discounted price. There will still be tons of them available for a while.




    Because under $40 was a good price. Over $40 is not a good value to me. I'm not a pro, the balls in the low to mid $30 price range work good enough for my game and I'm a plus handicap. I've never hit a mid price ball and thought, I'm really held back by this $35 ball...




    This always kills me. 42 CENTS per round. As a + handicap I assume you don't lose many. Or do you break out a fresh ball every 3 holes ? (Of course even then it'd only be an additional $2.50 per round). I can almost understand the high handicapper that loses 2 or 3 ball per round playing a rock hard cheapie but,,,,,,,,,,,



    With all the guys who spend $75 on a golf shirt only to wear it 4 or 5 times before they won't wear it again because they have newer and brighter ones ($15-$18 PER round)



    and the guys who spend $400 on a driver only to use it for 15 rounds or so and sell it for $250 if they're lucky ($10 PER round)



    or the guys who spend $150-$200 for a pair of shoes they wear maybe 20 times and then throw them away ($7-$10 PER round),



    or buying a set of irons for $1000 that a year or less later, say about 30 rounds, you can only get $400 for ($20 PER round),



    not to mention green fees of upwards of $30 PER round............. oops.



    It absolutely astonishes me that ANYBODY would balk at paying an additional 42 CENTS per round for the best golf ball for their game.



    Makes ZERO sense to me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,



    mind-blown.jpg




    You’re applying logic to the conversation and clearly that’s not for WRX browsers.
  • StumpnavStumpnav Members Posts: 141 ✭✭
    I heard release date was 23 Jan...but I wouldn't bet much money on my source!
    Epic 9.0 T800
    Epic 3W
    Epic Heavenwood
    (or Callaway UT XForged 18*)
    Callaway XForged 4-6
    Callaway MB 7-A
    Callaway MD Forged 56, 60
    Odyssey RSX001
    Chrome Soft X 18
  • HISPLHISPL Members Posts: 3,068
    Stumpnav wrote:


    I heard release date was 23 Jan...but I wouldn't bet much money on my source!




    I can’t remember the exact date but I thought it might have been early to mid February.



    That might be market dependant though.
  • ecfrittsecfritts Members Posts: 541 ✭✭
    groach wrote:


    I'm confused why people are so upset over $5? Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging your income, budget, etc. Hear me out.



    A new dozen PV1/PV1x costs $47.99 @ Dicks right now online. If the CS/CSX go from $39.99 to $44.99, they are still cheaper. Not as cheap, but still cheaper. Not to mention if this new ball costs more to make in terms of this new material, better believe that price is getting passed to consumers.



    My point is this - if you like a ball, and it truly performs for you, isn't paying another .42c per ball worth it? From a budget standpoint, that's one less coffee per month, or skipping one drive-thru meal. Your other option is to buy the 2017 versions at the discounted price. There will still be tons of them available for a while.




    I just picked up some yesterday for $31.99 a dozen!
    F8+
    M4 - 15*
    910 - 21*
    Srixon 765's
    VokeyTVD's
    Scotty Super Rat
Sign In or Register to comment.