Titleist Tour Soft

[Break81]

Guys it's not a premium ball, the Tour Soft is a Chrome Soft level ball. You're not going to see ProV1 performance

 

???? Chrome Soft is a "tour level" ball with performance comparable to the Pro-V1. If Tour Soft is on the same level as Chrome Soft, why would anyone need a Pro-V1?

 

It's all relative, just because the Chrome Soft is Callaway's best ball doesn't mean it's a premium ball. Why doesn't Henrik Stenson play it if it's tour level? I've hit the Chrome Soft and the Tour Soft a few rounds and the performance is comparable. They're both good mid level balls.

You realize that all tour players are playing balls we cannot buy direct? The ProV1 Ricky plays is not the shelf model you can buy. They are tour issued. Back on topic though, the CS and CSX are 100% in the same class as any tour level ball category.

[noodle3872]

Guys it's not a premium ball, the Tour Soft is a Chrome Soft level ball. You're not going to see ProV1 performance

 

???? Chrome Soft is a "tour level" ball with performance comparable to the Pro-V1. If Tour Soft is on the same level as Chrome Soft, why would anyone need a Pro-V1?

 

It's all relative, just because the Chrome Soft is Callaway's best ball doesn't mean it's a premium ball. Why doesn't Henrik Stenson play it if it's tour level? I've hit the Chrome Soft and the Tour Soft a few rounds and the performance is comparable. They're both good mid level balls.

You realize that all tour players are playing balls we cannot buy direct? The ProV1 Ricky plays is not the shelf model you can buy. They are tour issued. Back on topic though, the CS and CSX are 100% in the same class as any tour level ball category.

 

You’re joking about tour issue balls right? There are prototypes of balls however most Tour pros use the off the shelf ball.

[Break81]

Guys it's not a premium ball, the Tour Soft is a Chrome Soft level ball. You're not going to see ProV1 performance

 

???? Chrome Soft is a "tour level" ball with performance comparable to the Pro-V1. If Tour Soft is on the same level as Chrome Soft, why would anyone need a Pro-V1?

 

It's all relative, just because the Chrome Soft is Callaway's best ball doesn't mean it's a premium ball. Why doesn't Henrik Stenson play it if it's tour level? I've hit the Chrome Soft and the Tour Soft a few rounds and the performance is comparable. They're both good mid level balls.

You realize that all tour players are playing balls we cannot buy direct? The ProV1 Ricky plays is not the shelf model you can buy. They are tour issued. Back on topic though, the CS and CSX are 100% in the same class as any tour level ball category.

 

Youre joking about tour issue balls right? There are prototypes of balls however most Tour pros use the off the shelf ball.

tour issue = prototype . Not all prototypes make it to retail. It’s been documented a good majority of the well known players play prototype balls, while the bottom players play what is given to them from their sponsors.

Point is most of the balls on the leaderboard week in and week out are not exactly the same specs as what’s at your local club. Could you and I tell the difference ? Outside of stamping probably not. For a tour player , they are very specific.

[1Mordrid1]

Guys it's not a premium ball, the Tour Soft is a Chrome Soft level ball. You're not going to see ProV1 performance

 

???? Chrome Soft is a "tour level" ball with performance comparable to the Pro-V1. If Tour Soft is on the same level as Chrome Soft, why would anyone need a Pro-V1?

 

It's all relative, just because the Chrome Soft is Callaway's best ball doesn't mean it's a premium ball. Why doesn't Henrik Stenson play it if it's tour level? I've hit the Chrome Soft and the Tour Soft a few rounds and the performance is comparable. They're both good mid level balls.

 

Maybe for Stenson the Chrome Soft Spins too much for him? Or maybe he does not like the soft feel? We don't know specifically why he does not play it.

 

I have played both and off the tee they are similar, but that is where the similarities ended for me. With my current clubs my 8 iron is a hop and stop with the CSX18, ProV1, or even QST. With the Tour soft I get roll-out with the same shot, very comparable to what I would get with the Bridgestone E6 Soft.

 

So to call the Chrome Soft a mid level ball is quite laughable. I do not know what you look for in a ball, but I am happy for you if you think you have found it in the Tour Soft. For my game the ProV1 is a great ball around the green, but off the tee it is not a good fit for me.........that does not make it a mid level ball......it just means it is not the right ball for me.

[MBBG]

I bought a sleeve of these and played them for 9. In no way, shape, or form did they perform even remotely close to even low spin urethane balls.

 

Actually this was a very early season game for us so the extra run out helped me on several holes with the slower greens. But make no mistake, this ball performed the same for me as a Q Star, and should be regarded as such.

 

I gave my remaining two balls to my playing partner when we concluded our round.

[larryd3]

I tried them recently and they are ok but just got in the new Snell MTBs which I much prefer and at a better cost.

[J13]

I bought a sleeve of these and played them for 9. In no way, shape, or form did they perform even remotely close to even low spin urethane balls.

 

Actually this was a very early season game for us so the extra run out helped me on several holes with the slower greens. But make no mistake, this ball performed the same for me as a Q Star, and should be regarded as such.

 

I gave my remaining two balls to my playing partner when we concluded our round.

 

Of course because the Tour soft is an overpriced 2 piece ball that should be $25 a dozen like the rest of the discount surlyn balls. I just find it incredibly dishonest of Titleist to use the term "tour" when it's not a tour ball.

[North Butte]

Yeah, there aren't any other golf products with "Tour" in the name that are never used on any actual professional tour.

[J13]

Yeah, there aren't any other golf products with "Tour" in the name that are never used on any actual professional tour.

 

Titleist is supposed to be above such things. They are getting in the mud to play, problem they have is they wear white sport coats. Understand they pay more players on tour to play product then any other 2 companies combined. They are charging people $35 for a 2 piece surlyn ball. How are people not getting this by now. Why would anyone spend $35 on a inferior ball when they could get a MUCH better premium urethane ball for the same price or even less?

[North Butte]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

[linkerpan]

I bought a sleeve of these and played them for 9. In no way, shape, or form did they perform even remotely close to even low spin urethane balls.

 

Actually this was a very early season game for us so the extra run out helped me on several holes with the slower greens. But make no mistake, this ball performed the same for me as a Q Star, and should be regarded as such.

 

I gave my remaining two balls to my playing partner when we concluded our round.

 

Of course because the Tour soft is an overpriced 2 piece ball that should be $25 a dozen like the rest of the discount surlyn balls. I just find it incredibly dishonest of Titleist to use the term "tour" when it's not a tour ball.

 

As surlyn balls go, most of them should be around $10. Right there with the Slazengers of DSG or the Spongebobs from Walmart.

[leejohnkieh]

i bought a dozen of the yellow Tour Soft about a month ago since I had a ton of Puetz (local golf store) rebate money.

 

First initial look was pretty nice since they added the speckled paint for the yellow balls. Looks premium.

 

As for feel wise, they are just as soft as the CS. Not much spin green side otherwise I might just play this rather than spend $50 on TP5X or the ProV1x. I put a beating on one sleeve so far and they held up really well.

 

I wish they would just released yellow versions of premium balls like the ProV1x :fie:

[North Butte]

I wish they would just released yellow versions of premium balls like the ProV1 :fie:

 

Yellow AVX is rumored to be returning in May!

[J13]

i bought a dozen of the yellow Tour Soft about a month ago since I had a ton of Puetz (local golf store) rebate money.

 

First initial look was pretty nice since they added the speckled paint for the yellow balls. Looks premium.

 

As for play wise, it's about the same as the CS. I put a beating on one sleeve so far and they held up really well.

 

I wish they would just released yellow versions of premium balls like the ProV1 :fie:

 

Srixon Zstar XV has yellow.

[leejohnkieh]

i bought a dozen of the yellow Tour Soft about a month ago since I had a ton of Puetz (local golf store) rebate money.

 

First initial look was pretty nice since they added the speckled paint for the yellow balls. Looks premium.

 

As for play wise, it's about the same as the CS. I put a beating on one sleeve so far and they held up really well.

 

I wish they would just released yellow versions of premium balls like the ProV1 :fie:

 

Srixon Zstar XV has yellow.

 

I've actually never bothered to try it for some reason. I know a local Cleveland rep so I'll have to grab a few sleeves from him to try them out.

 

BTW the yellow color on the Tour Soft can't be compared. It's really good looking.

[North Butte]

My eyesight is pretty bad but I could tell the difference between my buddy's yellow Tour Soft and my yellow AVX at a distance of up to 50-60 yards if both were sitting in the short grass. The Tour Soft is definitely more reflective or something, stands out on a cloudy day and looks brighter from a distance than AVX.

 

It's weird, put them side by side and the shades of yellow are different but only slightly. But 50 yards away they look totally different.

[noodle3872]

Apparently surlyn is easier to boldly colour than urethane.

[Break81]

i bought a dozen of the yellow Tour Soft about a month ago since I had a ton of Puetz (local golf store) rebate money.

 

First initial look was pretty nice since they added the speckled paint for the yellow balls. Looks premium.

 

As for play wise, it's about the same as the CS. I put a beating on one sleeve so far and they held up really well.

 

I wish they would just released yellow versions of premium balls like the ProV1 :fie:

 

Srixon Zstar XV has yellow.

 

I've actually never bothered to try it for some reason. I know a local Cleveland rep so I'll have to grab a few sleeves from him to try them out.

 

BTW the yellow color on the Tour Soft can't be compared. It's really good looking.

they are hard to come bye but if you buy 5 dozens at a time , the Vice Pro Lime (ProV1 equal) is the best yellowish neon you will ever see. Buy a sleeve on eBay and see for yourself. They are available every few months direct from Vice

[BottleCap]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

[1Mordrid1]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

If a soft feel is more important to you than performance, why not just play the Wilson Duo? For $35 and up you should be getting more than just "feel" from a golf ball. It should also perform better for you than a Surlyn or Ionomer 2 piece ball.

[MBBG]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don’t agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can’t get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I’m not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can’t tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I’m sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

[Tanner25]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

If a soft feel is more important to you than performance, why not just play the Wilson Duo? For $35 and up you should be getting more than just "feel" from a golf ball. It should also perform better for you than a Surlyn or Ionomer 2 piece ball.

 

Duo is too soft

[Tanner25]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don't agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can't get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I'm not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can't tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I'm sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

 

Good point, either way - would anyone's score be different?

[North Butte]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don't agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can't get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I'm not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can't tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I'm sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

 

Judging from the guys at my club who have tried Tour Soft it's a very good performing 2pc Surlyn ball.

 

The guys who were previously playing the NXT Tour, NXT Tour S or Bridgestone e6 Soft really like the Tour Soft and a couple of them at least so far think it's something special.

 

The guys who were playing ProV1 and B330 found the Tour Soft disappointing and are going back to Urethane balls after they burn through their initial dozen Tour Soft.

 

There ain't no free lunch.

[BottleCap]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don’t agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can’t get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I’m not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can’t tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I’m sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

 

You don't necessarily get tour performance out of a urethane multi piece ball either. I'm not saying the Tour Soft is a Pro V1, I'm saying it's plays like a Chrome Soft.

[North Butte]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don't agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can't get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I'm not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can't tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I'm sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

 

You don't necessarily get tour performance out of a urethane multi piece ball either. I'm not saying the Tour Soft is a Pro V1, I'm saying it's plays like a Chrome Soft.

 

Except for yourself and jesusdelalata, everyone else seems to be finding it does not have short game spin anything at all like Chrome Soft or other urethane balls.

 

Perhaps you guys have more clubhead speed or play on more receptive greens than some of us.

[jesusdelallata]

I’m not sure about my club head speed with irons and wedges, but for reference I hit my 56 degree wedge 95 yards and on chips I tend to hit down and pinch the ball and creates spin.

[trackcoach13]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don't agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can't get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I'm not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can't tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I'm sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

 

You don't necessarily get tour performance out of a urethane multi piece ball either. I'm not saying the Tour Soft is a Pro V1, I'm saying it's plays like a Chrome Soft.

 

On what he likes most about Callaway's Chrome Soft ball:

SERGIO GARCIA: "Funny enough, I was talking to my caddie Glen [Murray] in Dubai and we were talking about the ball and all the equipment changes while we were on the course. He was saying to me that he knew the equipment was good but that he was hesitant about the ball. But after seeing it in action he thought the new ball was actually better than what I was playing previously. I feel more comfortable, it's great in the wind, and around the greens is better than the old ball.

 

"It also checks more so I have more shots around the green which allows me to be more aggressive. The versatility on those touch shots is what impressed me the most. Before, I had to be so precise to hit a shot around the green; now have a larger area to play with on the green to be creative."

[North Butte]

I hit my 56 degree about 80 yards (maybe a yard or two more if I go after it) and 95 buts me right betwen GW and PW. Around the greens I play "use the bounce" type chip and pitch shots. So low clubhead speed, not "pinching" the ball and super-firm hybrid Bermuda greens makes me need as much spin as I can get from a ball.

 

Heck, there's one guy I play with often who can actually control a Titleist Velocity which is way firmer and lower spin than Tour Soft. But he probably would hit a LW from 95 yards and just basically plays a different game than me.

[trackcoach13]

They have been charging somewhere around $35 for NXT Tour balls for a decade. And from what little I know of the Tour Soft (several guys I play with have been trying them lately, our pro shop is recommending them strongly) it seems to perform a bit better overall than the old NXT Tour.

 

So if Titleist were ever "above" putting Tour in the name of a ball not played on Tour they've been doing it for, what, 10-15 years with the NXT Tour?

 

No, Titleist simply advertised the Tour Soft compared to the Chrome Soft and that's what has this whole forum butt hurt.

 

Chrome Soft and Tour Soft feel similar and are both excellent balls at their street price. I wouldn't pay more than 35 a dozen for either one.

 

With all due respect I just don't agree at all. The TS has the trademark surlyn sound and feel off the wedges on feel shots.

 

I totally bought into the hype on this ball being something truly different, but as North Butte has been preaching for months, you just can't get tour ball performance out of a surlyn covered ball.

 

I'm not dogging the ball whatsoever, I just can't tell the difference between it and any other surlyn ball from a respected brand. I just think people properly calibrate their expectations. I was so happy to go back to my 330RX on the back nine yet I'm sure I could shoot the same scores playing the TS.

 

You don't necessarily get tour performance out of a urethane multi piece ball either. I'm not saying the Tour Soft is a Pro V1, I'm saying it's plays like a Chrome Soft.

 

Except for yourself and jesusdelalata, everyone else seems to be finding it does not have short game spin anything at all like Chrome Soft or other urethane balls.

 

Perhaps you guys have more clubhead speed or play on more receptive greens than some of us.

 

Nope that is not it at all. Just look at his signature, he is not here to provide real insight on how any ball plays, etc. Go back and read his various comments they offer no value whatsoever, just Titleist shill remarks.