2018 Titleist AVX Golf Balls

[Break81]

tried it yesterday. High ball, but medium spin player. Usually play TP5x or 2017 pro-v1x. Definitely lower off the driver, but didn't see much difference in height off irons and wedges. Full shot spin into greens seemed pretty normal, I didn't feel like i was getting more release. didn't have any opportunities to try low spinning chips, but that's not a shot I use a lot anyway.

 

Wasn't that windy, but performed way worse in the wind, especially cross-wind.

 

I'll probably play through the dozen then go from there - it made a big enough difference in driver height to continue, and didn't seem to lose much except for wind.

 

This is where alot of the confusion comes from and the disagreements. I would say 90% of the reviews say its the best wind ball period. I have personally never played with a ball that does not drift or balloon while playing in wind like the AVX. Probably more information about what equipment is being used and what your normal launch conditions are like would be helpful.

For years Srixon was the best wind performance ball. I have played the AVX and it is no better in the wind than the XV or Z-Star.

 

It might be way better in the wind vs other Titleist products but there are other option other people have overlooked based on brand preference.

[Gary Gutful]

That is all. No reason to go into this more, didn't see my one post turning into this.

 

Perhaps you might re-think the "panties in a bunch" and "You can't have it both ways people" phrases ? You have to admit phrases that that are pretty provocative and just begging for a response, no ?

 

I think the majority of posters around here are smart enough to understand that a few rounds of better or worse scores with one ball or another aren't conclusive (or at least I hope they would).

 

I won't pretend to remember the entire 22 pages of posts but I don't recall any "unicorn" type remarks noir do I recall any particular feistiness either. So when a high no handicapper comes out of nowhere, finds a ball, plays a few 9 holes and concludes it's not for him when many others around here have played it quite a bit more and almost surely have a better handle on how the ball performs, do you NOT expect him to get some pushback ?

You might not recall but I reckon there has been definite attitude towards anyone sharing an opinion that doesn’t align with the largely positive experiences that people have had.

 

It is a pissing contest with some memorable contributions from both sides of the debate. It would be remiss just to single one person out.

[Gary Gutful]

https://www.golfdige...social_facebook

 

Chamblee had it in play per the article. Article calling the AVX, “tour caliber”

 

Oh No! A Tour Pro playing the AVX! The Haters are going to come out in droves!!

 

AVX new haters claiming:

 

1) Its a prototype ball and not a real AVX

2) Titleist paid him to not use anything other then a ProV1

3) AVX is only a winterball because people on GolfWRX who are 1 handicaps cant spin a wedge shot.

4) AVX is too hard of a ball now,,ha ha

I hope he had only positive experiences with AVX. Good luck to him.

[nsxguy]

That is all. No reason to go into this more, didn't see my one post turning into this.

 

Perhaps you might re-think the "panties in a bunch" and "You can't have it both ways people" phrases ? You have to admit phrases that that are pretty provocative and just begging for a response, no ?

 

I think the majority of posters around here are smart enough to understand that a few rounds of better or worse scores with one ball or another aren't conclusive (or at least I hope they would).

 

I won't pretend to remember the entire 22 pages of posts but I don't recall any "unicorn" type remarks noir do I recall any particular feistiness either. So when a high no handicapper comes out of nowhere, finds a ball, plays a few 9 holes and concludes it's not for him when many others around here have played it quite a bit more and almost surely have a better handle on how the ball performs, do you NOT expect him to get some pushback ?

You might not recall but I reckon there has been definite attitude towards anyone sharing an opinion that doesn't align with the largely positive experiences that people have had.

 

It is a pissing contest with some memorable contributions from both sides of the debate. It would be remiss just to single one person out.

 

If you say so it must be true. I'm certainly not going back through 22 pages.

 

Thanks, I stand corrected.

[Zakers23]

The most polarizing ball in Golf lol

 

I agree though the confusion comes from the fact that other balls have character traits that 99% of people can agree on.

 

For whatever reason no one is having the same results, and it’s hilarious

 

I’d just recommend trying it.. if 4-5 Tour pros had it in play I bet half the naysayers would praise it.

 

Another note, when I say unicorn ball this is what I mean...

 

150 yard shot, all carry over water bunkers on right and left.

A Prov1x vs AVX..

 

Similaraly struck, Prov1x balloons just enough to catch a bounce and land in the bunker.

 

AVX goes high, but fights the balloon that extra 3-4 yards online keeps me on the fringe and allows me to make par

 

With the V1X I’m hitting out of a wet packed post Florida rain storm bunker, hit it 20 feet past and 2 putt..

 

Situations like that happen 2-3 times a round resulting in 2-3 strokes.

 

It’s not like all of a sudden I’m all world it just helps mask some of my recreational 7 handicap mis hits.

 

That’s why some people are saying, Unicorn ball!

[Gary Gutful]

That is all. No reason to go into this more, didn't see my one post turning into this.

 

Perhaps you might re-think the "panties in a bunch" and "You can't have it both ways people" phrases ? You have to admit phrases that that are pretty provocative and just begging for a response, no ?

 

I think the majority of posters around here are smart enough to understand that a few rounds of better or worse scores with one ball or another aren't conclusive (or at least I hope they would).

 

I won't pretend to remember the entire 22 pages of posts but I don't recall any "unicorn" type remarks noir do I recall any particular feistiness either. So when a high no handicapper comes out of nowhere, finds a ball, plays a few 9 holes and concludes it's not for him when many others around here have played it quite a bit more and almost surely have a better handle on how the ball performs, do you NOT expect him to get some pushback ?

You might not recall but I reckon there has been definite attitude towards anyone sharing an opinion that doesn't align with the largely positive experiences that people have had.

 

It is a pissing contest with some memorable contributions from both sides of the debate. It would be remiss just to single one person out.

 

If you say so it must be true. I'm certainly not going back through 22 pages.

 

Thanks, I stand corrected.

You don't have to go back 22 pages. Just look at your last post!

 

"If you say so it must be true". Too funny!

[nsxguy]

That is all. No reason to go into this more, didn't see my one post turning into this.

 

Perhaps you might re-think the "panties in a bunch" and "You can't have it both ways people" phrases ? You have to admit phrases that that are pretty provocative and just begging for a response, no ?

 

I think the majority of posters around here are smart enough to understand that a few rounds of better or worse scores with one ball or another aren't conclusive (or at least I hope they would).

 

I won't pretend to remember the entire 22 pages of posts but I don't recall any "unicorn" type remarks noir do I recall any particular feistiness either. So when a high no handicapper comes out of nowhere, finds a ball, plays a few 9 holes and concludes it's not for him when many others around here have played it quite a bit more and almost surely have a better handle on how the ball performs, do you NOT expect him to get some pushback ?

You might not recall but I reckon there has been definite attitude towards anyone sharing an opinion that doesn't align with the largely positive experiences that people have had.

 

It is a pissing contest with some memorable contributions from both sides of the debate. It would be remiss just to single one person out.

 

If you say so it must be true. I'm certainly not going back through 22 pages.

 

Thanks, I stand corrected.

You don't have to go back 22 pages. Just look at your last post!

 

"If you say so it must be true". Too funny!

 

You call that a "pissing contest" ? So any difference of opinion is a pissing contest then.

 

OK, got it. My bad. :rofl: :hi:

[Gary Gutful]

There is a tone and attitude that isn’t particularly inclusive and probably stops others making more contributions. We can agree to disagree but I believe it is definitely present on both sides of the argument. In this interests of balance I thought it was worth pointing out that it isn’t just exclusive to one person.

 

Have a great day NSX. 10.30am on Friday here and I am about to tee off at the wonderful Indooroopilly Golf Course.

[North Butte]

...the wonderful Indooroopilly Golf Course.

 

Easy for you to say.

[Gary Gutful]

I might think it is crap in about 4 hours time.

[ShortGameJunkie]

That is all. No reason to go into this more, didn't see my one post turning into this.

 

Perhaps you might re-think the "panties in a bunch" and "You can't have it both ways people" phrases ? You have to admit phrases that that are pretty provocative and just begging for a response, no ?

 

I think the majority of posters around here are smart enough to understand that a few rounds of better or worse scores with one ball or another aren't conclusive (or at least I hope they would).

 

I won't pretend to remember the entire 22 pages of posts but I don't recall any "unicorn" type remarks noir do I recall any particular feistiness either. So when a high no handicapper comes out of nowhere, finds a ball, plays a few 9 holes and concludes it's not for him when many others around here have played it quite a bit more and almost surely have a better handle on how the ball performs, do you NOT expect him to get some pushback ?

 

Because I did not refer to anyone specifically nor did I mean to I didn’t think it would spark the reaction it did, I didn’t think it was provocative. Just thought people would read and move on for the most part.

 

Again I don’t want to call anyone out but there were people referring to it as a unicorn ball, either by exact words or others. And no, no one got very “feisty” or attacked anyone but we’re numerous posts very quickly trying to completely discredit someone’s opinion while those same others had nothing negative to say when the “unicorn” type talk was going on.

 

Again didn’t want or expect my post to turn into this so I will leave it be from here on out.

 

Please continue with the reviews and useful conversation.

[TsarBomba]

Something I find interesting here. From.what I can tell, based on the large majority of testers here. The ball fliess lower and longer for those who normally may hit it high with too much spin. Trade off is reduced spin around the greens. Seems fairly simple to evaluate. I may try the ball. The consistency in the comments is pretty obvious and meaningfull. Enough that I would feel pretty confident that if somebody came in here and claims it flies high with horrible back spin, I know it's BS or based on 2 bad hits..that's the purpose of this forum and am glad to have this resource over the bogus magazine advertising influenced nonsense.

 

The charatoristics for this ball, and the Ksig (for example, though different) could easily be derived from the threads.

 

Hmmmmmm.

[cjblake09]

I love this ball and how straight and long it goes. That being said if you are playing fast/hard greens it will take some getting use to for sure. All depends on the trade off you want to give up.

[cologilo]

 

 

I just learned the difference tonight during a PGA Tour Van fitting at PGA Tour Superstore .... the spin difference, for me was measurable to say the least.

[BiggErn]

Good to know the only discernible measurable was much less spin. Add less or the same distance, higher or the same launch, and no difference in apex and you have a game changer.

[Gary Gutful]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

[North Butte]

Something I find interesting here. From.what I can tell, based on the large majority of testers here. The ball fliess lower and longer for those who normally may hit it high with too much spin. Trade off is reduced spin around the greens. Seems fairly simple to evaluate. I may try the ball. The consistency in the comments is pretty obvious and meaningfull. Enough that I would feel pretty confident that if somebody came in here and claims it flies high with horrible back spin, I know it's BS or based on 2 bad hits..that's the purpose of this forum and am glad to have this resource over the bogus magazine advertising influenced nonsense.

 

The charatoristics for this ball, and the Ksig (for example, though different) could easily be derived from the threads.

 

Hmmmmmm.

 

Your description is basically what I read about the ball when the test period started. But in fact I found no discernible loss of spin around the greens. The reduced spin (judging from my experience and from various online published launch monitor comparisons) is negligible off the driver and in short game shots. AVX spin is much lower on iron shots, especially longer irons while being only triviall lower (a couple percent maybe?) otherwise.

 

It is pretty remarkable how they were able to get spin separation specifically just for full swings with irons and wedges while having so little effect on driver and short game, all with a three piece construction. I don’t think it is a Unicorn, I’d reckon other manufacturers could build a similar spin and trajectory profile if they wanted to. Probably nobody in the industry realized there was a niche for a lower flying ball with high short game spin and low iron spin.

 

P.S there is a slightly lower spin off a 40-yard sand wedge or whatever but apparently only on the order of 3,4,5 percent.

[Break81]

I would love to see AVX and the new Project A on a monitor side by side , just saying they probably would be very close on data.

[argee1977]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

[North Butte]

I would love to see AVX and the new Project A on a monitor side by side , just saying they probably would be very close on data.

 

Can't say anything about the new Project A but the original one several years ago I found to be horrible. One of the few balls I've tried in the past decade that was noticeably, significantly shorter than normal distance. And very lacking in stopping power on iron shots. Can't recall about the short game as it was so poor on full shots (particularly driver) that I didn't extensively try it out around the greens.

 

If they managed to make it normal distance in the new version it may be a genuine alternative. I have a hard time trying updated versions of balls whose earlier models were really poor.

[North Butte]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

 

I think it's always a matter of just where ones personal trade-off limit might fall.

 

For most Tour players, ten extra yards of roll off the tee and a half-club distance gain with the irons might be attractive but not so much they'd give up ANY spin performance on approach shots and short game. The extra distance is worth less to them and the lack of spin is far more important to them than it would be for me.

 

As someone who plays a 360-yard hole by driving the ball 210-215 yards and then hitting a full 7-iron from 145, turning that into a 220+ yard drive and a 140-yard 8-iron is a big advantage. And while I need my iron shots to stop on firm greens, I'm not trying to knock down flags from 185 or hit low spinners from just off the green so any spin beyond what AVX gives me is surplus to requirement.

 

6-irons from 150 I can benefit a lot from turning that into a 220+ yard drive and

[nsxguy]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

 

I think it's always a matter of just where ones personal trade-off limit might fall.

 

For most Tour players, ten extra yards of roll off the tee and a half-club distance gain with the irons might be attractive but not so much they'd give up ANY spin performance on approach shots and short game. The extra distance is worth less to them and the lack of spin is far more important to them than it would be for me.

 

As someone who plays a 360-yard hole by driving the ball 210-215 yards and then hitting a full 7-iron from 145, turning that into a 220+ yard drive and a 140-yard 8-iron is a big advantage. And while I need my iron shots to stop on firm greens, I'm not trying to knock down flags from 185 or hit low spinners from just off the green so any spin beyond what AVX gives me is surplus to requirement.

 

6-irons from 150 I can benefit a lot from turning that into a 220+ yard drive and

 

Excellent summation. Agree 100%.

 

On similar hit shots my Cally CS hit and stuck, something I like a LOT. The AVX hits and sticks only on soft greens but on "normal" greens and similar shots it hits and release 3-5 feet. I can live with that.

 

Also, great point about us hackers being short all the time - a little (extra ?) roll out will help us far more often than it will hurt us.

 

Of course, for those who hit it perfectly all the time, I can see where this would be a (slight) disadvantage.

[Break81]

I like to play pin high or short as uphill puts are much easier , especially for a golfer who only gets 60-70 rounds per year.

Also scrambling for Par is usually easier from off the front of the green so it’s actually a strategy to play a little short on most holes. (Unless a front pin tucked behind a bunker or just over water). Normally if I have. 170 shot to the pin my club I pull is my 165 club and not my 175 club for example. Pros can take a little off when they need too, I simply know my limitations.

 

 

[duffer18]

Brand new to the AVS debates. Amused at the passion behind the differing views. I don't usually use premium balls, I'm a 13 hi hacker with a swing speed around 90. But I was playing alone today and found an AVX on the course, so I used it against my regular ball a few times. Was amazed at the increased distance I got off the driver, did not curve that much, and it didn't hurt me around the greens. So I bought a sleeve and will give it a try. And when I start to suck with it, as I do with pretty much any ball I use, I'll move on looking for the ball that doesn't exist, the one that I can reliably hit where it's supposed to go, and let youse guys in this thread continue the debate.

[Gary Gutful]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

Nope.

 

I see the majority of amateurs hit low knuckleballs that run through greens or up onto greens. The last thing they need is lower launch and less spin.

 

Maybe you guys get more rain and/or have superior agronomy in your part of the world. But in my experience most amateurs need more spin with their balls or irons, not less.

 

This video from Mark Crossfield made a lot of sense to me. It is easier to take spin off shots rather than add it. He makes reference to AVX at 7 min without specifically naming it. The same could apply to TP5x which I play but it at least provides more launch and trajectory so that it doesn't sacrifice as much stopping power.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

 

I think it's always a matter of just where ones personal trade-off limit might fall.

 

For most Tour players, ten extra yards of roll off the tee and a half-club distance gain with the irons might be attractive but not so much they'd give up ANY spin performance on approach shots and short game. The extra distance is worth less to them and the lack of spin is far more important to them than it would be for me.

 

As someone who plays a 360-yard hole by driving the ball 210-215 yards and then hitting a full 7-iron from 145, turning that into a 220+ yard drive and a 140-yard 8-iron is a big advantage. And while I need my iron shots to stop on firm greens, I'm not trying to knock down flags from 185 or hit low spinners from just off the green so any spin beyond what AVX gives me is surplus to requirement.

 

6-irons from 150 I can benefit a lot from turning that into a 220+ yard drive and

I didn't experience an extra 10 yards off the tee with AVX. I haven't played any golf ball that is considerably longer than another one off the tee. In my experience on course and with launch monitors there isn't much of a difference with a driver from ball to ball.

[North Butte]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

 

I think it's always a matter of just where ones personal trade-off limit might fall.

 

For most Tour players, ten extra yards of roll off the tee and a half-club distance gain with the irons might be attractive but not so much they'd give up ANY spin performance on approach shots and short game. The extra distance is worth less to them and the lack of spin is far more important to them than it would be for me.

 

As someone who plays a 360-yard hole by driving the ball 210-215 yards and then hitting a full 7-iron from 145, turning that into a 220+ yard drive and a 140-yard 8-iron is a big advantage. And while I need my iron shots to stop on firm greens, I'm not trying to knock down flags from 185 or hit low spinners from just off the green so any spin beyond what AVX gives me is surplus to requirement.

 

6-irons from 150 I can benefit a lot from turning that into a 220+ yard drive and

I didn't experience an extra 10 yards off the tee with AVX. I haven't played any golf ball that is considerably longer than another one off the tee. In my experience on course and with launch monitors there isn't much of a difference with a driver from ball to ball.

 

This is the only ball I have ever seen that is significantly longer than normal off my driver. There are a few awful balls out there which are shorter than normal but most balls of any cinstruction will be the same distance off the tee for me.

 

Except this one. First time I’ve ever seen it. Now mind, it is all due to ten or so yards of extra rollout. If the fairways are wet and drives are plugging it flies exactly the same as ProV1 or B330 or for that matter a SuperSoft or DT Solo. No extra carry distance. But definitely extra roll.

[Gary Gutful]

I like to play pin high or short as uphill puts are much easier , especially for a golfer who only gets 60-70 rounds per year.

Also scrambling for Par is usually easier from off the front of the green so it’s actually a strategy to play a little short on most holes. (Unless a front pin tucked behind a bunker or just over water). Normally if I have. 170 shot to the pin my club I pull is my 165 club and not my 175 club for example. Pros can take a little off when they need too, I simply know my limitations.

Surely you play courses that have greens that slope both front to back and back to front?

 

Also, I didn't think previous posters were suggesting that they deliberately keep the ball short. I thought they were arguing that they sometimes hit it short due to a poor strike?

[Gary Gutful]

Less spin only works with a shyteload more launch and trajectory.

 

Doubt it, maybe on the PGA Tour, where you have fast greens and pro's who are getting the full spin out of the ball, most of us on here are playing greens that aren't anywhere as fast, not hitting all shots into greens that well, and for the majority of amateurs, we're hitting short of the pin most of the time anyway, so less spin may work better for most!

 

I think it's always a matter of just where ones personal trade-off limit might fall.

 

For most Tour players, ten extra yards of roll off the tee and a half-club distance gain with the irons might be attractive but not so much they'd give up ANY spin performance on approach shots and short game. The extra distance is worth less to them and the lack of spin is far more important to them than it would be for me.

 

As someone who plays a 360-yard hole by driving the ball 210-215 yards and then hitting a full 7-iron from 145, turning that into a 220+ yard drive and a 140-yard 8-iron is a big advantage. And while I need my iron shots to stop on firm greens, I'm not trying to knock down flags from 185 or hit low spinners from just off the green so any spin beyond what AVX gives me is surplus to requirement.

 

6-irons from 150 I can benefit a lot from turning that into a 220+ yard drive and

I didn't experience an extra 10 yards off the tee with AVX. I haven't played any golf ball that is considerably longer than another one off the tee. In my experience on course and with launch monitors there isn't much of a difference with a driver from ball to ball.

 

This is the only ball I have ever seen that is significantly longer than normal off my driver. There are a few awful balls out there which are shorter than normal but most balls of any cinstruction will be the same distance off the tee for me.

 

Except this one. First time I’ve ever seen it. Now mind, it is all due to ten or so yards of extra rollout. If the fairways are wet and drives are plugging it flies exactly the same as ProV1 or B330 or for that matter a SuperSoft or DT Solo. No extra carry distance. But definitely extra roll.

You must be a very good golfer to be able to control your trajectory that well.

[North Butte]

 

I think it's always a matter of just where ones personal trade-off limit might fall.

 

For most Tour players, ten extra yards of roll off the tee and a half-club distance gain with the irons might be attractive but not so much they'd give up ANY spin performance on approach shots and short game. The extra distance is worth less to them and the lack of spin is far more important to them than it would be for me.

 

As someone who plays a 360-yard hole by driving the ball 210-215 yards and then hitting a full 7-iron from 145, turning that into a 220+ yard drive and a 140-yard 8-iron is a big advantage. And while I need my iron shots to stop on firm greens, I'm not trying to knock down flags from 185 or hit low spinners from just off the green so any spin beyond what AVX gives me is surplus to requirement.

 

6-irons from 150 I can benefit a lot from turning that into a 220+ yard drive and

I didn't experience an extra 10 yards off the tee with AVX. I haven't played any golf ball that is considerably longer than another one off the tee. In my experience on course and with launch monitors there isn't much of a difference with a driver from ball to ball.

 

This is the only ball I have ever seen that is significantly longer than normal off my driver. There are a few awful balls out there which are shorter than normal but most balls of any cinstruction will be the same distance off the tee for me.

 

Except this one. First time I’ve ever seen it. Now mind, it is all due to ten or so yards of extra rollout. If the fairways are wet and drives are plugging it flies exactly the same as ProV1 or B330 or for that matter a SuperSoft or DT Solo. No extra carry distance. But definitely extra roll.

You must be a very good golfer to be able to control your trajectory that well.

 

No. I compare balls over hundreds of shots in actual on-course playing conditions. I own and use a laser. And I have been playing the same course 120-140 times a year for more than a decade so I know exactly what “normal distance” means for my tee shots.

 

There are fairway bunker I can just barely carry with a ProV1x. Those carries are still a close call with AVX. There are days when it rains 3” the night before and every tee shot plugs in the fairway. Those days are perfect for comparing balls (and those days suck for actually playing golf). So yeah, my trajectory and distance varies all over the place. But after 50 or 100 shots with each ball across a dozen different day I can tell if one is longer or not.

 

I’m not one of these guys who go play nine holes with one ball, then nine with another and declare the new ball a game changer. But after a dozen rounds with a new ball, including a couple playing it side by side with my usual, I can be pretty sure whether it is leaving me closer to the hole or not.