Jump to content

North Butte

Advanced Members
  • Posts

    13,446
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

North Butte last won the day on August 9

North Butte had the most liked content!

Personal Information

  • Handicap
    13
  • Location
    East Coast USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

North Butte's Achievements

1.7k

Reputation

  1. SALE COMPLETED Thanks to everyone who contacted me about the balls.
  2. Brand new, this year's model, low numbers, yellow Pro V1 balls. Three dozen. Price is $125 firm, shipped to you via USPS. No trades.
  3. Yes, that's the sort of thing I meant by "horse race" in my comments. It doesn't really matter which "horse" puts his nose across the line first. All I want is a list of the "horses" that were part of the photo finish.
  4. Am I correct in assuming that R10 won't know anything about gear effect? Or do you tell it you're hitting driver or fairway wood and it applies a fudge factor of some kind to approximate the gear effect?
  5. I definitely benefit (couple of strokes) from a big ol' SGI iron rather than a more player-ish one. Other than maybe a bit tougher time digging the ball out of the rough I'd say the only downside to the SGI irons is the once per round or so I come a little OTT and instead of just a pull I get these high pull-draw-hook monsters that can end up just miles offline and probably long as well. When I had AP2's and such I don't recall ever hitting that shot. Or not more than once in a blue moon anyway. But it is always waiting to bite me when my "hit" impulse takes over with the hot-faced, large-body irons I play now. On balance one disaster shot per round is easier to deal with than the steady drip-drip-drip of strokes wasted from mediocre contact resulting in anemic shots with the smaller clubs.
  6. I'm very UNcomfortable playing anything but a "stock" swing with an iron. But it's interesting, I end up with the same issue from an only slightly shorter distance when I'm between my shortest iron (46-degree AW goes flies about 108) and my longest wedge when I carried the 52-degree (about 92 yards). I could hit the 52-degree really hard with the face hooded a bit and maybe eke 95 or so out of it but for me that's just a stupid swing to be trying from anything other than a perfect lie. So if I had 100 yards there was no real choice but to hit the AW. Get the greens firm, a touch of breeze behind and my little choke down back in stance AW would end up flying 105 and taking a big bounce forward. Now I've got the 50-degree and can hit a 96, 97 yard shot without swinging hard. Even with a breeze behind it'll stop pretty quick.
  7. And if you spend way too much time transcribing their 8-iron numbers you'll see that the relative Total-Carry differences are just about always what you'd expect given the relevant spin and descent angle when comparing two balls.
  8. They aren't doing it quite as much as in the previous test IMO but they still tend to present the results as some sort of horse race where how a ball ranks in the distance metric is the main thing and all the other characteristics are add-ons. Or maybe I'm just overly sensitive and they aren't really exaggerating the distance horse race but that's how it seems to me. I didn't listen to their preliminary comments a couple weeks ago but they apparently teased something about the Tour Speed being a huge deal that would surprise everyone. All I see is it's near (but not at) the top for driver distance at high clubhead speeds. Treating 3-4 yards extra off the driver for big hitters compared to other popular models as a Stop The Presses headline material is really milking it IMO.
  9. For this spring and the early part of the summer I had a 46-degree AW as part of my iron set and then 52 and 58 degree wedges. The gap from 52 to 58 was no problem but over time I seemed to end up at what would be the perfect yardage for a 50-degree wedge like 3, 4, 5 times a round. It was unreal how often that was happening. In theory, no reason I couldn't have just invested a little range time and gotten good at taking 15 yards off my 46-degree AW. But I took the easy way out, got rid of the 52 and replaced it with a 50 and 54. Still, I get what he's doing. That's a pitching wedge, a sand wedge and a lob wedge. Nothing limiting about that if you have a good wedge game which Kisner certainly does.
  10. I think even though supposedly the general performance of golf balls is limited by USGA/R&A testing, in fact there have been gradual optimizations and exploitation of loopholes in the testing to gradually eke out a few more yards over the past decade or so. Not night and day differences but incremental improvements here and there. I doubt that applies to the K-Sig. It's no doubt a ball that can be produced with no major R&D using intellectual property that's not specifically owned and protected by the major OEM's. So I'd imagine whatever design it's based on hasn't really kept up with the latest and greatest ways of sneaking in a few more yards under the rules. The test results make it almost seem like a throwback to circa 2005 when there was still a tendency where playing a ball with gobs of spin necessarily meant compromising a bit on outright distance. By about 2012 to my perception that tradeoff no longer existed for the mainstream OEM balls. But K-Sig is kind of a 3pc time warp ball in that sense.
  11. Be careful. Yes, a properly struck wedge shot will come off the club at maybe 20 degrees or so lower than the loft of the wedge. That is not the issue. It's what can happen with a severely bad swing with a wedge that you have to account for. I don't think I'm unique but with almost any club you can name (not just LW) I am capable of hitting one out of every 50 or 100 balls over an 8' tall net that's 8' in front of me. And then there's the lateral issues (hosel rockets, toe-jams, several pulls) that can escape to the left or right of a net that far away. Be very careful.
  12. Let me say this, with the caveat that I'm a pretty low clubhead speed player (compared to their test results for "85mph" I hit my irons a tiny bit farther and my driver slightly shorter) and a 15-ish handicap... The Chrome Soft has never suited me quite right even though I did play one of the earlier generations for a year or so. Flight seemed kind of flat and green holding power seemed borderline. I also kind of thought that earlier version I played was a bit disappointing in driver distance. I played just a few holes with CXS-LS alongside the Chrome Soft X (as in hitting all shots with both balls) and didn't bother with the LS for any longer. It just didn't perform at all for me. But the Chrome Soft X and I just immediately hit it off. It's just as long as a Pro V1 or Pro V1x, nice high flight (by my low-hitter standards) and it had none of the ball releasing too much issues or the occasional "10 yards longer" hot iron shots that I had experienced with regular Chrome Soft. When I look at the 85mph test results it does seem a bit unique, although actually two of the balls most similar to it are Pro V1 and Pro V1x both of which I've played a lot and liked. Give it a try.
  13. I think aerodynamic performance is very, very good nowadays on even the cheapest white-label Asian factory knockoff ball. But I do think there are still differences that matter in the dimple designs of various models. But aero performance is a second-order type thing that only really comes into consideration after you've found a ball that suits in terms of ball speed and spin with various clubs. A ball that's slow off the club or doesn't spin enough (or spins too much) for me isn't going to be bailed out by having better dimples. But among balls that are otherwise similar, I do perceive some subtle differences in ball flight from the "aero package". I also think the whole aerodynamic thing becomes a bigger issue for players with the ability to choose and control their trajectory with all their clubs. Moreso than duffers like me who just want to hit a decent shot as often as possible and who don't/can't consciously "flight" the ball.
  14. Feel free to rant. But I'm pretty sure even as a terribly inconsistent golfer that if I'd been playing a certain ball for months and I switched to one that was 5-10 yards shorter (or longer) then after 20 or 30 rounds I'd be getting a pretty strong inkling that something had changed. I play 150+ times a year on the same course I've been playing for decades. My swing is horribly variable from swing to swing and day to day but it doesn't change massively over time. So when I hit a shot solidly I have a pretty darned good idea where it's going to end up, unless it gets a bad bounce or there's a lot of wind or something. Would I swear in court that Ball A was 6.85 yards shorter than Ball B after I compared them? Of course not. Could I be fooled into thinking Ball A was shorter than Ball B over a period of a few rounds due to variation in my swing? Absolutely. But in the long run I sure as hell am not going to play a ball that's 5-10 yards shorter than usual unless there's a mighty big advantage to the ball otherwise to make up for the lost distance. And as I've commented above, when I look at this sort of test on balls I've played dozens or hundreds of rounds with the test results are spookily concurrent with my own subjective (long term) impressions.
  15. Postscript to my comments above... I just realized I can substract the Carry distance from Total distance for 8-iron to get an idea of stopping power. It's kind of amazing that just through random trial and error I settled on Chrome Soft X where the rollout (85mph equiv.) was about 15 yards which is one of the quickest stopping balls on the list. The balls I'd played previously are Pro V1 and Pro V1x and they're around 16 yards. Still quicker stopping than most. And the Chrome Soft (not X) that I tried and thought didn't hold greens well enough comes in at nearly 18 yards rollout with their test 8-iron setup. AVX is similar with just over 18 yards rollout I know we're talking about stopping maybe 8 feet quicker with an 8-iron, less than a 20% difference. Not the end of the world if every shot rolls out that little bit extra. But I'll be darned if, with no launch monitor, I didn't eventually end up liking balls that stop quicker than average and being disappointed with the ones that don't.
×
×
  • Create New...