2011 Compression Data

storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
The new 2011 compression testing from golfballselector.com (not affiliated and don't really recommend but this data is very helpful)



There are many new 2011 balls missing, but it looks like they will be testing those in the future. Biggest surprise....B330-RXS overall compression in the high 70's and the softest cover tested. This literally makes it the softest urethane ball to date.
«1

Comments

  • honketyhankhonketyhank Uncle Horace Members Posts: 1,593
    What does MPI stand for in those tables?
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭


    What does MPI stand for in those tables?




    It is a 100 point rating scale they use. I just disregard it and focus on the averages.
  • ThreeOnParFiveThreeOnParFive Members Posts: 241


    What does MPI stand for in those tables?






    I was wondering the same thing but can't find any explanation on the website about it.
  • bryanrbryanr All things in moderation. Except moderation. Members Posts: 939



    What does MPI stand for in those tables?






    I was wondering the same thing but can't find any explanation on the website about it.




    "The MPI™ is the Mayes Performance Index™ – a patent pending golf ball rating method that establishes a standard performance index for distance, spin, feel, durability, and price allowing relative comparisons of golf balls and fitting to specific golfer profiles."
  • CornbreadCornbread Members Posts: 471
    Same file / document as before with the addition of 18 balls. I'll take what I can get however.
  • tampaytampay Members Posts: 381
    Nice to see an accurate compression rating of the Gamer v2. That info was hard to find. Thanks
  • crazygolfnutcrazygolfnut CrazyGolfNut Members Posts: 1,176 ✭✭
    Top-Flite Gamer V2 (10) 2010 85 63 91 70 83 93



    There are two averages listed for the Gamer, Majestix at 85 and Atti at 91.



    Which one should a person look at?
    • Driver: ________ Ping G400 Max
    • Woods: _______ Ping G410 3 & 5 woods
    • Hybrids: ______ Titleist 818H1 21* & 25*
    • Irons: _________ Titleist 718 AP1 6-W
    • Wedges: ______ Titleist Vokey SM6 52.08F & 56.08M
    • Putter: ________ Rife Mid Mallet 400
    • Ball: ___________ Snell MTB Red Yellow - looking for a replacement
    • Bag: ___________ Datrek Lite Rider
    • GPS: ___________ Bushnell NEO Ghost
    • Rangefinder: __ Precision Pro NX7
    • GHIN: _________ HCP floats between 10 and 12

    “Never bet against an old man with old clubs that have new grips”
  • makigrlmakigrl Members Posts: 42
    edited Mar 23, 2011 #9


    Top-Flite Gamer V2 (10) 2010 85 63 91 70 83 93



    There are two averages listed for the Gamer, Majestix at 85 and Atti at 91.



    Which one should a person look at?




    Does the current V2 Gamer really have an 85 or 91 compression? I though the Gamer V2 was suppose to be a more durable ball making it Harder than the original Gamer. I though the newer Gamer V2 ball would have a higher compression. I'm guessing the newer Gamer ball just has a harder cover than the original Gamer.
  • crazygolfnutcrazygolfnut CrazyGolfNut Members Posts: 1,176 ✭✭
    edited Mar 23, 2011 #10
    I guess I am confused. Here are the numbers for the gamers



    Manufacturer Model Year - Avg MPI - Avg MPI - Avg MPI

    109 Top-Flite Gamer (08) 2008 - 98 79 - 95 77 - 83 93

    110 Top-Flite Gamer V2 (10) 2010 - 85 63 - 91 70 - 83 93



    since all for formating does not copy well, you can find it on the attachment listed on one of the first postings. I just dont know how to make sense out of it.



    image/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':rolleyes:' />
    • Driver: ________ Ping G400 Max
    • Woods: _______ Ping G410 3 & 5 woods
    • Hybrids: ______ Titleist 818H1 21* & 25*
    • Irons: _________ Titleist 718 AP1 6-W
    • Wedges: ______ Titleist Vokey SM6 52.08F & 56.08M
    • Putter: ________ Rife Mid Mallet 400
    • Ball: ___________ Snell MTB Red Yellow - looking for a replacement
    • Bag: ___________ Datrek Lite Rider
    • GPS: ___________ Bushnell NEO Ghost
    • Rangefinder: __ Precision Pro NX7
    • GHIN: _________ HCP floats between 10 and 12

    “Never bet against an old man with old clubs that have new grips”
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
    edited Mar 23, 2011 #11


    I guess I am confused. Here are the numbers for the gamers



    Manufacturer Model Year - Avg MPI - Avg MPI - Avg MPI

    109 Top-Flite Gamer (08) 2008 - 98 79 - 95 77 - 83 93

    110 Top-Flite Gamer V2 (10) 2010 - 85 63 - 91 70 - 83 93



    since all for formating does not copy well, you can find it on the attachment listed on one of the first postings. I just dont know how to make sense out of it.



    image/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':rolleyes:' />




    Forget the MPI, it is just a calculation based on each measurement. GBS.com uses two different machines to test compression and one for cover hardness. The Majestix measured an average compression of 85 and Atti an average of 91. The cover hardness measured an average of 83. So the Gamer V2 has a lower compression than the original. These numbers should be used to compare other balls within this test.
  • larrybudlarrybud Members Posts: 11,230 ✭✭
    So how does one select a ball based on compression and cover hardness (without signing up for 30 bucks)??
  • CornbreadCornbread Members Posts: 471
    larrybud wrote:


    So how does one select a ball based on compression and cover hardness (without signing up for 30 bucks)??


    They read one of the many previous posting here about how compression relates to their particular swing speed.
  • uddudd Members Posts: 7 ✭✭
    The data contains two entries for Z-star and Z-star X for 2009 versions. One entry is listed as Z star (without a dash) and the other Z-star (with a dash). The compression data is not the same for these entries.

    Are there two different Z-star and Z-star X 2009 versions and if not does anyone know which entries are the correct ones?
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
    udd wrote:


    The data contains two entries for Z-star and Z-star X for 2009 versions. One entry is listed as Z star (without a dash) and the other Z-star (with a dash). The compression data is not the same for these entries.

    Are there two different Z-star and Z-star X 2009 versions and if not does anyone know which entries are the correct ones?




    I think it is a duplicate as those were not there last year and they haven't tested the 2011 ZStars yet. They also have two listings for the Nike Vapor. I wouldn't worry about it as the numbers are within a couple compression points.
  • muzzmuzz Banned Posts: 923
    I was given a Dz TM LDP Blacks for XMAS this year...I read the spin rate thing that was done a couple of years ago(it did VERY well in that test), and was wondering why it didn't get more love around here....now I know why.......compression tested at 117, which makes it one of the toughest balls to compress ever.....I play the 07 V1 right now, so that's about 27 compression points difference!
  • jones137jones137 Members Posts: 2,596
    Very interesting stuff.



    All the balls I like are around the same compression and cover hardness. My favorite golf balls are the Penta's, 2009 330-S's, 2009 Z-Star X's and the 2009 Prov1x's. All are around 103-106 compression while my ss is around 107-109.



    Also explains why I couldn't get any distance out the TP Blacks or Tour i(z)'s. Based on my experience I'd need to be in the 115-120 range to properly compress these balls.
    Titleist 915D2 9.5* Rogue Black 95MSI 60S
    Callaway XHot Pro 15* Project X 6.5
    Mizuno MP Fli Hi 2 Iron C-Taper X
    Bridgeston J40CB 3-PW Project X 6.0
    Ping Anser 54*,60* Project X 6.0
    Taylormade Imola 8 35"
  • JBent9610JBent9610 Members Posts: 406 ✭✭
    Storm, thank you for posting the data, I appreciate it. I like to put it into Excel and use it to find balls with similar data. I don't know how well that will work for real world though.



    I use the Avg of each compression column to find balls within 3 points of both columns and with a cover hardness equal to or softer than a comparable ball.



    For example, I tried the TP Red 2008 data (since it's a popular ball on this site). I used it's AVG numbers (95 and 92) to find balls that were within 3 points (92-98 and 89-95) with a cover hardness of 80 or less. The only ones that fit that criteria are:



    2007 Bridgestone E5+ (97, 95, and 79)

    2007 Titleist ProV1 (93, 95, and 78)

    2010 Wilson FG Tour (93, 92, and 76)



    3 balls met both of the AVG criteria, but not the cover hardness (although one is very close):



    2008 Top Flite Gamer (98, 95, but 83)

    2007 Srixon Z-URS (98, 95, but 81)

    2007 Callaway HX Pearl (95, 94, but 87)



    Several balls met only one of the compression (AVG) but did meet the cover hardness:

    2008 B330-RX, 2006 B330-S, 2006 Nike One Platinum, 2006 ProV1, 2009 ProV1



    I don't know if these will play close to the TP Red (never played any of these balls, including the TP Red), but it could be a starting point when trying to find a ball replacement.



    With that said, my favorite ball was the Burner TP, but I also tried, and liked, the 2010 NXT Tour and 2009 Nike Tour D. Their compressions are not within 3 points of each other, so my comparisons, and this whole write up, are probably worthless.
    Fast 12LS/Classic Custom XL/King LTD
    Super LS/Tisi Tec/RBZ Stage2/F6 Baffler/Egg Spoon/CB1
    Halo/4DX
    X-20/XL2000/EX-1/RaptureJ/GC Mid/Deep Red II
    ISI W2/EX-1
    685BX/X-Forged Vintage/GAS1 Forged/Eye2+
    WHP 2-Ball
  • dansrixondansrixon Members Posts: 2,370 ✭✭
    storm319 wrote:


    The new 2011 compression testing from golfballselector.com (not affiliated and don't really recommend but this data is very helpful)



    There are many new 2011 balls missing, but it looks like they will be testing those in the future. Biggest surprise....B330-RXS overall compression in the high 70's and the softest cover tested. This literally makes it the softest urethane ball to date.






    The 2011 Z-star, and Z-StarXV have the softest covers ever on the market, but these are not in the test.
    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
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
    dansrixon wrote:

    storm319 wrote:


    The new 2011 compression testing from golfballselector.com (not affiliated and don't really recommend but this data is very helpful)



    There are many new 2011 balls missing, but it looks like they will be testing those in the future. Biggest surprise....B330-RXS overall compression in the high 70's and the softest cover tested. This literally makes it the softest urethane ball to date.






    The 2011 Z-star, and Z-StarXV have the softest covers ever on the market, but these are not in the test.




    By softest I meant lowest compession which it definitely is. It happened to also have the softest cover tested, but I am sceptical of their cover testing considering they don't use the industry standard Shore D scale. We will see when they test the rest of the new balls for 2011.



    I was given some ZStars this weekend by a rep at Golfsmith. I will say that they feel alot softer than the previous ZStar off the putter.
  • ireire Members Posts: 90
    Great info, thanks for the post! I get a lot of questions from members about which ball they should be playing. Now I can give them a much more difinitive answer!
  • CNY_HitchCNY_Hitch Members Posts: 92
    Awesome info. Now i can incorporate some unbiased data into my overanalysis....
  • sk373sk373 Members Posts: 1,413
    It happened to also have the softest cover tested, but I am sceptical of their cover testing considering they don't use the industry standard Shore D scale.




    why should that be cause for any skepticism? their scale, just like the Shore D scale, is a relative measure of hardness.
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
    sk373 wrote:

    It happened to also have the softest cover tested, but I am sceptical of their cover testing considering they don't use the industry standard Shore D scale.




    why should that be cause for any skepticism? their scale, just like the Shore D scale, is a relative measure of hardness.




    Some of the findings just make me question the accuracy of this method. For example, in this test the Callaway Diablo tested at 79 for cover hardness. The i(s) tested at 83. How is Callaway's softest urethane cover testing harder than their budget 2-piece surlyn cover? Callaway just happens to have Shore D findings on their site. The i(s) is 46D. They no longer have the 09 Diablo specs on their site but their softest surlyn ball is rated at 56D. Very different findings and I will trust the industry standard measurement system that has been used for 90 years over what ever GBS.com uses.
  • sk373sk373 Members Posts: 1,413
    edited Apr 5, 2011 #25
    Some of the findings just make me question the accuracy of this method. For example, in this test the Callaway Diablo tested at 79 for cover hardness. The i(s) tested at 83. How is Callaway's softest urethane cover testing harder than their budget 2-piece surlyn cover? Callaway just happens to have Shore D findings on their site. The i(s) is 46D. They no longer have the 09 Diablo specs on their site but their softest surlyn ball is rated at 56D. Very different findings and I will trust the industry standard measurement system that has been used for 90 years over what ever GBS.com uses.




    i understand where you are coming from. this may help explain the discrepancy (from [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shore_durometer"]wikipedia's article on Shore durometer[/url]):


    The final value of the hardness depends on the depth of the indenter after it has been applied for 15sec on the material. If the indenter penetrates 2.54 mm (0.100 inch) or more into the material, the durometer is 0 for that scale. If it does not penetrate at all, then the durometer is 100 for that scale. It is for this reason that multiple scales exist. Durometer is a dimensionless quantity, and there is no simple relationship between a material's durometer in one scale, and its durometer in any other scale, or by any other hardness test.




    from [url="http://www.golfballtest.org/?cat=14"]GBS's website[/url] regarding their cover hardness test:


    Cover Hardness is a measurement of how much the golf ball’s surface indents when a constant load is applied to it. It is an indication of how a golf ball feels around the green. The lower the rating the more the ball indents and feels softer, the higher the rating the less the ball indents and feels firmer.




    fwiw, while the Tour i(s) has greater greenside spin, the 09 BB Diablo *feels* softer to me--it's practically a marshmallow.



    it seems to me that the scales may be measuring different things, since the lower Shore D rating of the Tour i(s) certainly corresponds to its greater greenside spin characteristics.
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
    sk373 wrote:




    fwiw, while the Tour i(s) has greater greenside spin, the 09 BB Diablo *feels* softer to me--it's practically a marshmallow.



    it seems to me that the scales may be measuring different things, since the lower Shore D rating of the Tour i(s) certainly corresponds to its greater greenside spin characteristics.




    The 09 Diablo will feel softer on most shots because it is nearly 40 compression points lower overall than the i(s). Both scales are measuring the same thing which is cover hardness. I don't want to argue and I know you are just trying to be Devil's Advocate. All of this data should be taken with a grain of salt and not taken as fact which is exactly what I am doing.
  • sk373sk373 Members Posts: 1,413
    edited Apr 5, 2011 #27
    The 09 Diablo will feel softer on most shots because it is nearly 40 compression points lower overall than the i(s). Both scales are measuring the same thing which is cover hardness. I don't want to argue and I know you are just trying to be Devil's Advocate. All of this data should be taken with a grain of salt and not taken as fact which is exactly what I am doing.




    i'm not just "trying to be devil's advocate".



    i quoted what GBS's own site states about what they are measuring in terms of cover hardness. on and around the green, compression matters diddly squat in terms of feel, and that's what i was referring to, even if i may not have been completely clear about it.



    hence, they may not be measuring quite the same thing, since Shore D rating does not seem to correlate strongly regarding greenside feel, but definitely correlates well regarding greenside spin.



    it seems that based on my experience, GBS's measurements may correlate well regarding greenside feel--which is what they *said* they were measuring.



    in other words, they may be looking for different characteristics regarding cover hardness.
  • storm319storm319 Members Posts: 3,767 ✭✭
    edited Apr 5, 2011 #28
    sk373 wrote:

    The 09 Diablo will feel softer on most shots because it is nearly 40 compression points lower overall than the i(s). Both scales are measuring the same thing which is cover hardness. I don't want to argue and I know you are just trying to be Devil's Advocate. All of this data should be taken with a grain of salt and not taken as fact which is exactly what I am doing.




    i'm not just "trying to be devil's advocate".



    i quoted what GBS's own site states about what they are measuring in terms of cover hardness. on and around the green, compression matters diddly squat in terms of feel, and that's what i was referring to, even if i may not have been completely clear about it.



    hence, they may not be measuring quite the same thing, since Shore D rating does not seem to correlate strongly regarding greenside feel, but definitely correlates well regarding greenside spin.



    it seems that based on my experience, GBS's measurements may correlate well regarding greenside feel--which is what they *said* they were measuring.



    in other words, they may be looking for different characteristics regarding cover hardness.




    Both methods are doing the same thing but are just worded differently (both use the word "indent". There is no way to test for different playing characteristics when both are simply poking a something into plastic cover and seeing how deep it goes.



    Your statement about compression is not accurate. Yes, core compression has little or nothing to do with the feel around the greens, but overall compression which takes into account all layers does. Urethane balls tend to have a thinner cover being compressed against a mantle layer which is the hardest part of the ball. Soft surlyn balls generally have a thicker cover compressing against a much soft core rather than a hard mantle which is why you may perceive it to feel softer on low impact shots. However, it does not mean that it has a softer cover.
  • sk373sk373 Members Posts: 1,413
    Your statement about compression is not accurate. Yes, core compression has little or nothing to do with the feel around the greens, but overall compression which takes into account all layers does. Urethane balls tend to have a thinner cover being compressed against a mantle layer which is the hardest part of the ball. Soft surlyn balls generally have a thicker cover compressing against a much soft core rather than a hard mantle which is why you may perceive it to feel softer on low impact shots. However, it does not mean that it has a softer cover.




    wrong, not when you are talking about shots on and around the green. when chipping and putting, you aren't compressing the ball nearly enough for overall ball compression to matter much in terms of feel.
  • ObsessotronObsessotron Members Posts: 1,583
    The B330-RX and RXS are almost too soft. I used to love them, but I have been swinging faster this year and I feel sometimes like I am not hitting anything at all.
  • PotatoheadPotatohead Members Posts: 2,894 ✭✭
    Interesting, the One Tour is much higher compression than the One Tour D?



    Also the Cally i(z) is a brick, lol
Sign In or Register to comment.