2021 Golf Ball Test

[North Butte]

Yes, Titleist balls are pretty much the most expensive mainstream brand (in USA at least). But they are, for instance, a just $2/dozen more expensive than Callaway. And Callaway also enforces MAP on their balls (and clubs) just like Titleist. 

 

If someone really prefers a Pro V1x to a Chrome Soft it's hard to imagine they buy the Chrome Soft for $48 because the Pro V1x is too expensive. But sure, they might buy a K-Sig just because it's so much cheaper.

 

What you're really objecting to is companies which price their products at a higher price point. You prefer not to pay premium prices, like a lot of other people. Nothing wrong with that, my wife would probably rather I wasn't quite so willing to pay list price for golf stuff when there's cheaper alternatives!

 

P.S. As for Titleist sponsoring Tour players the advertising the fact that Tour players play Titleist balls and clubs, I mean c'mon. That's been done for decades by all the big golf equipment companies. In fact, the "big" companies get that way in part because the Tour endorsement thing is so effective. I personally share your belief that the entire concept is hogwash but you and I thinking it doesn't mean it doesn't pay off. That's not a Titleist thing, that's an industry-wide thing.

 

P.P.S. And companies suing each other is hardly news. 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2021 by North Butte

[Nessism]

I'm proud to say that I've never paid more than $25/dozen for any of the various urethane cover balls in my (over loaded) ball cabinet.  I've got Bridgestone B something or another's, Wilson Duo U's, and a grip load of Z Stars (my favorite - especially the yellow.)  Oh, and I just bought some Kirklands too.  No Titleist, or Callaway, although I've had Callaway's before, when there were sales.  Talk of $48 or $50 a dozen balls is like a foreign language to me.  I just don't understand why people follow the ad dollars like that when they don't have to.  One of my good golf buddies plays Taylormade everything, including their (expensive) balls.  I love this guy and I've offered to give him a brand new box of Bridgestone's for free, but he just loves Taylormade and that's the end of it.  Like I said in another thread, "ball selection is where the brain leaves the body."

[NoTalentLefty]

I’ve bought them all. Titleist has a ball for everybody. Pro V1 is not my first pick but it’s a great ball, so I went to the TruFeel. With my game I can’t tell that much other than the Pro V1 stops better just not 24 dollars better.

[Mr. Grumpy]

Titleist balls carry a premium because they defined that market and they are some of the best balls out there. That said, there are a lot of good balls on the market, which will get you almost there in terms of performance. Heck, I have 3 of my best 4 rounds on a course found cheap ball - Pinnacle Gold or whatever new name. 

 

I prefer the PV1-X, then the Tour B RXS,, but I have had good days with a Chrome Soft, Never a Taylormade, and a Srixon Z-star. They all have their pluses (except Taylormade),,,, but I seem to always feel more confidence with the PV1-X.. Until the Bridgestone e12 Contact.. This ball is a combination of all (except Taylormade) and at a lower price point. It's my fave new ball top to bottom..

[nsxguy]

48 minutes ago, Nessism said:

I'm proud to say that I've never paid more than $25/dozen for any of the various urethane cover balls in my (over loaded) ball cabinet.  I've got Bridgestone B something or another's, Wilson Duo U's, and a grip load of Z Stars (my favorite - especially the yellow.)  Oh, and I just bought some Kirklands too.  No Titleist, or Callaway, although I've had Callaway's before, when there were sales.  Talk of $48 or $50 a dozen balls is like a foreign language to me.  I just don't understand why people follow the ad dollars like that when they don't have to.  One of my good golf buddies plays Taylormade everything, including their (expensive) balls.  I love this guy and I've offered to give him a brand new box of Bridgestone's for free, but he just loves Taylormade and that's the end of it.  Like I said in another thread, "ball selection is where the brain leaves the body."

 

I'm proud to say I've never sacrificed consistent performance for $2 per round- the difference between a Titleist ProV1 and a $25/doz ball.

 

My bag cost me around $2K. Greens fees average around $50 per round. I'm not going to play a cheaper ball, most likely negatively affecting my game, to save $2 per round.

 

The better/more serious the player the more that player appreciates and depends on consistency. Consistency of distance, and especially consistency of chipping and putting.

 

Now if one is losing a sleeve per round that player probably can't tell the difference between balls anyway and by all means should be playing the cheapest ball they can find. Wouldn't make any difference.

 

I guess I agree with you. "Ball selection IS where the brain leaves the body."

[ShowMe]

8 hours ago, Nessism said:

 

I'm allergic to Titleist balls.  Something about $100M in annual ad spending for promotion and price fixing at 40/dozen doesn't jive with my sensibilities.   

Amen to that!  While it may not technically be price-fixing, their MAP is definitely anti-capitalistic.

 

Ping does the same thing with their clubs, though, and I notice you have a bag full of Pings.  What's up with that?

[ShowMe]

On 8/4/2021 at 10:40 PM, tsecor said:

i played the 2021 TP5X today and its much different than the 2019 ball. I feel they ruined the TP5x because while its a better all around ball than the 2019, its "just another ball". The 2019 version at least occupied a unique space and was very hard but flew far. Now the X is like every other ball in the 90-95 compression range. It doesn't fly that far though. i actually lost almost 10 yards in comparison to the Prov1.  

 

I was disappointed in the performance, not because its not a good ball, but because it didnt stand out in any area. I have to say its a very "boring" ball if that makes sense. 

Well, it's not the right ball for you, but for somebody else it could be the best ball they've ever used.  For example, Pro Vs are horrible for me.  Just don't get along with them.  That doesn't mean they'll be horrible for anybody else though.

[ShowMe]

13 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

I'm proud to say I've never sacrificed consistent performance for $2 per round- the difference between a Titleist ProV1 and a $25/doz ball.

 

My bag cost me around $2K. Greens fees average around $50 per round. I'm not going to play a cheaper ball, most likely negatively affecting my game, to save $2 per round.

 

The better/more serious the player the more that player appreciates and depends on consistency. Consistency of distance, and especially consistency of chipping and putting.

 

Now if one is losing a sleeve per round that player probably can't tell the difference between balls anyway and by all means should be playing the cheapest ball they can find. Wouldn't make any difference.

 

I guess I agree with you. "Ball selection IS where the brain leaves the body."

For me, Pro Vs are very consistent.  Consistently bad, that is.  Very poor performers off the tee and with full iron shots.  I'd much rather have a ball that will consistently get me on the green in regulation and not have to worry about chipping.  I can name several $25-$30/doz balls that do that better for me than Pro Vs.

 

Just because a ball works for you, doesn't mean it works for everybody.

[Nessism]

10 minutes ago, ShowMe said:

Amen to that!  While it may not technically be price-fixing, their MAP is definitely anti-capitalistic.

 

Ping does the same thing with their clubs, though, and I notice you have a bag full of Pings.  What's up with that?

 

Ebay!  And on occasion I buy a new putter or wedge from my local shop because I like those guys.  

[ShowMe]

Just now, Nessism said:

 

Ebay!  And on occasion I buy a new putter or wedge from my local shop because I like those guys.  

Makes sense.  They can't control the prices of their used clubs, thankfully.  There's no doubt that Ping engineers some great clubs.  I've been using their irons ever since the i20s came out.

[NRJyzr]

1 hour ago, Mr. Grumpy said:

Titleist balls carry a premium because they defined that market and they are some of the best balls out there.

 

LOL

 

Titleist balls carry a premium because they pay a lot of money to a lot of pros to play their balls.  As well as seeding the junior level.

 

[nsxguy]

12 minutes ago, ShowMe said:

For me, Pro Vs are very consistent.  Consistently bad, that is.  Very poor performers off the tee and with full iron shots.  I'd much rather have a ball that will consistently get me on the green in regulation and not have to worry about chipping.  I can name several $25-$30/doz balls that do that better for me than Pro Vs.

 

Just because a ball works for you, doesn't mean it works for everybody.

 

Feel free to show me where I said anything resembling that.

 

TIA 👍

[ShowMe]

2 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Feel free to show me where I said anything resembling that.

 

TIA 👍

"I'm proud to say I've never sacrificed consistent performance for $2 per round- the difference between a Titleist ProV1 and a $25/doz ball."

 

Just because $25/doz. balls are not consistent performers for you, doesn't mean they aren't consistent performers for somebody else.  YW  👍

[nsxguy]

11 minutes ago, ShowMe said:

"I'm proud to say I've never sacrificed consistent performance for $2 per round- the difference between a Titleist ProV1 and a $25/doz ball."

 

Just because $25/doz. balls are not consistent performers for you, doesn't mean they aren't consistent performers for somebody else.  YW  👍

 

Nice try dude but I was speaking for myself.

 

Reading is fundamental.

 

YW 👍

[Mr. Grumpy]

22 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

LOL

 

Titleist balls carry a premium because they pay a lot of money to a lot of pros to play their balls.  As well as seeding the junior level.

 

Yes they probably do, but they also rake in revenue off their PV line. They defined the "premium" ball market. All others are playing catch up to cash in. Just look at where others position their premium balls. Just Under Titleist..

Or, I guess you could say that Titleist places their balls atop Taylormade.. 

[ShowMe]

4 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Nice try dude but I was speaking for myself.

 

Reading is fundamental.

 

YW 👍

So is sentence structure and tone...dude.  Your post was very condescending.  Your handicap is not low enough to be able to get away with that.  Wait.  Was that condescending?  Oops...

[nsxguy]

19 minutes ago, ShowMe said:

So is sentence structure and tone...dude.  Your post was very condescending.  Your handicap is not low enough to be able to get away with that.  Wait.  Was that condescending?  Oops...

 

The reader (that would be you) is the one who reads "tone" into the written word.

 

I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you. 🤦‍♀️

 

And I won't even bother asking you what handicap has to do with one's opinion about golf balls.

 

Last word here, about this particular tempest in a teapot, is yours.

 

YW 👍

[ShowMe]

12 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

The reader (that would be you) is the one who reads "tone" into the written word.

 

I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you. 🤦‍♀️

 

And I won't even bother asking you what handicap has to do with one's opinion about golf balls.

 

Last word here, about this particular tempest in a teapot, is yours.

 

YW 👍

"Tone in writing refers to the writer's attitude toward the reader and the subject of the message. The overall tone of a written message affects the reader just as one's tone of voice affects the listener in everyday exchanges" - Purdue University Writing Lab

 

"Tone in writing is not really any different than the tone of your voice. You know that sometimes it is not what you say, but how you say it.

 

It is the same with writing. Every adjective and adverb you use, your sentence structure, and the imagery you use will show your tone. The definition of "tone" in literature is the way the author expresses his attitude through his writing.

 

The tone can change very quickly or may remain the same throughout the story. Tone is expressed by your use of syntax, your point of view, your diction, and the level of formality in your writing." - YourDictionary dotcom

 

The writer sets the tone.  Yours was condescending and continues to be with successive posts.  I suspect this is not the first time you've been told this.  Nor will it likely be the last.

 

 

[gibbiesmalls]

On 7/28/2021 at 3:13 PM, rkelso184 said:

So the 2021 golf ball test is done and dusted with numbers being crunched ATM. On Mi Gulf Spi (sorry can't say their name as it gets bleeped) YouTube they have made some pretty interesting comments to start

 

*Chrome Soft appears to have improved

*TaylorMade is a disappointment 

*Titleist Tour Speed is really really good

*Dont get fit with range balls

*Dont play refurb balls 

 

What other takeaways do you expect to see? What do you think will be the "best ball"? I personally just went back to the ProV1x and think once again they will be the ball to beat.

 

 

 

I was really surprised and intrigued by their comments about how much affect on ball flight scuffs on a ball make.  They seemed to imply there is a marked affect on ball flight by relatively minor scuffs (like a cart path rash, or tree rash)

 

As someone who's been known to play a ball until I get to the center of a 5 piece ball, now if I so much as to see my own sharpie lines disappear,  that ball is going in the shag bag!

 

 

[elwhippy]

TBH tried the 2021 TP5X and found it short off all the clubs and felt soggy as in a muted contact. Not what you expect off a premium X ball.

 

However the website that shall not be named butchered the new XV and CS LS. I am using both at the moment and picked up length and control. 

[North Butte]

7 hours ago, Nessism said:

 

Ebay!  And on occasion I buy a new putter or wedge from my local shop because I like those guys.  

You can buy used Titleist balls on eBay for less than your $25/dozen price point by the way.

 

The Chrome Soft X balls that I'm playing right now I bought brand new off eBay for less than $20/dozen.

 

It sounds like you're not so much "allergic to Titleist" as simply "allergic" to any balls or clubs you can't buy really cheaply. Lots of respectable people are thrifty and only buy stuff on sale. Not sure why your thriftiness gets expressed as continuous off-topic complaints about Titleist in various threads. 

[North Butte]

2 hours ago, gibbiesmalls said:

I was really surprised and intrigued by their comments about how much affect on ball flight scuffs on a ball make.  They seemed to imply there is a marked affect on ball flight by relatively minor scuffs (like a cart path rash, or tree rash)

 

As someone who's been known to play a ball until I get to the center of a 5 piece ball, now if I so much as to see my own sharpie lines disappear,  that ball is going in the shag bag!

 

 

How could a scruff on a golf ball NOT cause the flight to change?

 

Manufacturers optimize dimple shape and the thickness of the paint layer on golf balls to a fraction of a thousandth of an inch. They wouldn't go to all that expense and trouble if it didn't matter. 

[bluedot]

Some of you are talking about the retail price of ProV1's as if it is far out of line with other premium golf balls, and that just isn't true AT ALL.  ProV1's are a couple of dollars higher than TM's or Callaway's or Bridgestone's top of the line balls; on the Golf Galaxy website this morning, ProV1's are priced at $49.99; TP5's, Chrome Softs, and Bridgestones are ALL at $47.99.  Forgive me for missing the economic significance of $.17 a ball.  Gimme a break...

 

And all of that begs the question of whether or not most of us are paying full retail in the first place, for ProV1's or any other ball.  I stock up when the previous model year goes on sale, usually for $10 a dozen less.  And Titleist runs a loyalty program every year along the lines of buy three, get one free, or something like that.  And that doesn't even touch on gift cards, pro shop credit, the need of relatives to figure out what to give the guy who has everything, and so on.  I almost always put a brand new ball on the tee on the first hole of every round I play; I don't know when the last time I paid full retail might have been.

 

And finally, as to Ping and Titleist/Footjoy and pricing.  Both companies have the same goal with their pricing structure; to protect their retailers from unfair competition FROM OTHER RETAILERS.  The PGA Superstore lost the Titleist/Footjoy account for almost two years; no clubs, no shoes, no apparel, and no golf balls because they sold ProV1's below the MSRP.  They were using the ProV1, in effect, as a loss leader, and smaller stores, not to mention green grass pro shops, would suffer because they were too small to take a loss on golf balls, so Titleist pulled the account.  The PGA Superstore made a decision, and Titleist made a decision; if you think that is somehow "anti-capitalistic", you need to take an Econ class right away.  Private ownership and a price system ARE capitalism, for crying out loud, and Ping and Titleist/Footjoy simply tell retailers that if they choose to sell below the MSRP, they will choose not to sell them any more product.  Welcome to the free market!

 

 

[Nessism]

2 hours ago, North Butte said:

It sounds like you're not so much "allergic to Titleist" as simply "allergic" to any balls or clubs you can't buy really cheaply. Lots of respectable people are thrifty and only buy stuff on sale. Not sure why your thriftiness gets expressed as continuous off-topic complaints about Titleist in various threads. 

 

I don't like Titleist because in my view they promote elitism.  

[North Butte]

1 minute ago, Nessism said:

 

I don't like Titleist because in my view they promote elitism.  

I'm guessing you can keep coming up with these "reasons" all day so I'm out. Not going to engage any farther. It's become embarrassing at this point.

 

[phil75070]

20 minutes ago, bluedot said:

on the Golf Galaxy website this morning, ProV1's are priced at $49.99; TP5's, Chrome Softs, and Bridgestones are ALL at $47.99. 

Do you think if ProV1's were selling for $39.99/dz that TP5's, Chrome Softs and Bridgestones would still be $47.99 or would they be $37.99? I think Titleist sets the high end price that others follow.

Edited August 7, 2021 by phil75070

[dlygrisse]

If I learned one thing from the original tests it’s that some brands make a more consistent product than others.  Part of what you get with the more expensive Titlest is better QC.  They proved for example, that Callaway has extremely low standards for quality, so much so that it caused Callaway to retool their production practices. 
 

as Forrest Gump would say, “ life is like a box of golf balls, you never know what you are going to find”

[Nessism]

19 minutes ago, bluedot said:

Some of you are talking about the retail price of ProV1's as if it is far out of line with other premium golf balls, and that just isn't true AT ALL.  ProV1's are a couple of dollars higher than TM's or Callaway's or Bridgestone's top of the line balls; on the Golf Galaxy website this morning, ProV1's are priced at $49.99; TP5's, Chrome Softs, and Bridgestones are ALL at $47.99.  Forgive me for missing the economic significance of $.17 a ball.  Gimme a break...

 

And all of that begs the question of whether or not most of us are paying full retail in the first place, for ProV1's or any other ball.  I stock up when the previous model year goes on sale, usually for $10 a dozen less.  And Titleist runs a loyalty program every year along the lines of buy three, get one free, or something like that.  And that doesn't even touch on gift cards, pro shop credit, the need of relatives to figure out what to give the guy who has everything, and so on.  I almost always put a brand new ball on the tee on the first hole of every round I play; I don't know when the last time I paid full retail might have been.

 

And finally, as to Ping and Titleist/Footjoy and pricing.  Both companies have the same goal with their pricing structure; to protect their retailers from unfair competition FROM OTHER RETAILERS.  The PGA Superstore lost the Titleist/Footjoy account for almost two years; no clubs, no shoes, no apparel, and no golf balls because they sold ProV1's below the MSRP.  They were using the ProV1, in effect, as a loss leader, and smaller stores, not to mention green grass pro shops, would suffer because they were too small to take a loss on golf balls, so Titleist pulled the account.  The PGA Superstore made a decision, and Titleist made a decision; if you think that is somehow "anti-capitalistic", you need to take an Econ class right away.  Private ownership and a price system ARE capitalism, for crying out loud, and Ping and Titleist/Footjoy simply tell retailers that if they choose to sell below the MSRP, they will choose not to sell them any more product.  Welcome to the free market!

 

 

 

If you watch the Deals forum various nice ball deals come up regularly, or at least they used to pre covid-19.  Srixon runs buy one get one free promos roughly once a year, and there were lots of deals on the old version when they came out with something new.  Taylormade takes excess inventory and stamps them PRATICE and drop the price in half.  Callaway deals were out there fairly regularly too.  I remember they sold a ton of balls to MG Golf one time because they changed their mind about releasing that model in their normal supply chain.  It was a somewhat harder ball back when they were pushing their Chromesoft ball.  Anyway, MG sold these Callaway's for about $20 a dozen.  I similarly stocked up on bulk packed Bridgestone tour balls as sold by Budget Golf.  Wilson had various deals too.  

 

Point is, there are deals to be had on lots of great urethane tour level balls for cheap...except for Titleist.  A "sale" with Titleist is $5 off.  

[North Butte]

7 minutes ago, phil75070 said:

Do you think if ProV1's were selling for $39.99/dz that TP5's, Chrome Softs and Bridgestones would still be $47.99 or would they be $37.99? I think Titleist sets the high end price that others follow.

If Pro V1 was $60 and still the most popular ball then the other companies would price at $55-$58 or something like that. If Pro V1 was $40 they would probably undercut it at $36-$38. That’s just rational pricing for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc place brands. 
 

If Titleist demonstrate that millions of golfers will pay $50/dozen for golf balls then that’s information the other brands use to set their prices. 

[NRJyzr]

10 minutes ago, Nessism said:

 

If you watch the Deals forum various nice ball deals come up regularly, or at least they used to pre covid-19.  Srixon runs buy one get one free promos roughly once a year, and there were lots of deals on the old version when they came out with something new.  Taylormade takes excess inventory and stamps them PRATICE and drop the price in half.  Callaway deals were out there fairly regularly too.  I remember they sold a ton of balls to MG Golf one time because they changed their mind about releasing that model in their normal supply chain.  It was a somewhat harder ball back when they were pushing their Chromesoft ball.  Anyway, MG sold these Callaway's for about $20 a dozen.  I similarly stocked up on bulk packed Bridgestone tour balls as sold by Budget Golf.  Wilson had various deals too.  

 

Point is, there are deals to be had on lots of great urethane tour level balls for cheap...except for Titleist.  A "sale" with Titleist is $5 off.  

 

Titleist is a little too close to a cult.  LOL

 

Not just golfballs, either...