2023 Maxfli Tour, Tour X and Tour S

[JohnnyO3478]

3 hours ago, zebra2955 said:

Like the comparison. I have tried all three myself. I also eliminated the X . But the difference is I like the S a little more then the Tour. Just because I like the feel of the S off the putter.

 

I can see that.  I'll be doing a bunch of head to head for putting between the two when my new backyard green is installed in a couple of weeks.

[xkilgorextroutx]

21 hours ago, zebra2955 said:

Like the comparison. I have tried all three myself. I also eliminated the X . But the difference is I like the S a little more then the Tour. Just because I like the feel of the S off the putter.

 

Agreed on the putter feel, I felt the same about the S as well. I bought a few dozen in yellow, I'll start my season off with those (well at least once I knock the rust off) and see how things go.

[zebra2955]

55 minutes ago, xkilgorextroutx said:

Agreed on the putter feel, I felt the same about the S as well. I bought a few dozen in yellow, I'll start my season off with those (well at least once I knock the rust off) and see how things go.

I also switched to the yellow. But first I have to finish off all the white , About 8 dozen or so LOL

[darsony]

On 2/22/2024 at 10:40 AM, zebra2955 said:

Like the comparison. I have tried all three myself. I also eliminated the X . But the difference is I like the S a little more then the Tour. Just because I like the feel of the S off the putter.

 

I'm just the opposite of you guys. I've used all three and the Tour X is by far the best choice. Sure it is harder and you may not like the sound but the distance is real. It is definitely longer than the Tour and S.  Not only does the X go farther but it spins around the green like a top. That's a hard combination to achieve.  

[JohnnyO3478]

8 minutes ago, darsony said:

I'm just the opposite of you guys. I've used all three and the Tour X is by far the best choice. Sure it is harder and you may not like the sound but the distance is real. It is definitely longer than the Tour and S.  Not only does the X go farther but it spins around the green like a top. That's a hard combination to achieve.  

To be clear - my objection to the Tour X is not solely performance based - it is mainly a quality control issue, as Foremost has historically been bad at producing 4 pc balls that have consistent compression and concentric layers. They do much better with 3 pc balls.

 

The performance issue that I would have with them if the QC was up to snuff - would be how they perform for me on mis-hits - which I am bound to have.  The Tour and the Tour S would not be as punishing for me.

 

To your point about the performance combination of distance off the T and spin around the green being rare - I must say that the data published last year completely supports that.  At each end of the swing speed spectrum there's only one ball that goes farther and spins more in robot testing.  Very interesting point.

[Mike412]

On 2/23/2024 at 1:23 PM, JohnnyO3478 said:

To be clear - my objection to the Tour X is not solely performance based - it is mainly a quality control issue, as Foremost has historically been bad at producing 4 pc balls that have consistent compression and concentric layers. They do much better with 3 pc balls.

 

The performance issue that I would have with them if the QC was up to snuff - would be how they perform for me on mis-hits - which I am bound to have.  The Tour and the Tour S would not be as punishing for me.

 

To your point about the performance combination of distance off the T and spin around the green being rare - I must say that the data published last year completely supports that.  At each end of the swing speed spectrum there's only one ball that goes farther and spins more in robot testing.  Very interesting point.

This is where I land. If the QC was better I’d be all over them. I still may give them a try though.

 

Edited March 2 by Mike412

[Minarets]

I have not and probably won’t try out the X as the characteristics just aren’t what I’m looking for but have tried bout the Tour and Tour S now and I actually see very little playing difference.  Maybe if I got them on a sim but playing wise both were plenty long, spun well enough around greens.  Really the only place I can really tell a difference was with the putter.  The S does feel softer but not a ton.  I could play either happily.  
 

Im only a yellow player.  (But will play white if only a PIX). The Maxfli yellow isn’t my favorite yellow when side by side other yellows but when it’s all I’m playing on the course I like it. It’s more yellow than Titleist which is more subdued and has a tad more green to it. I much prefer that Titleist yellow.  Maxfli yellow durability isn’t as strong as Titleist either but doesn’t justify the price difference. 
 

I can happily play the Maxfli but at this point prefer the 2024 AVX. still want to play the TP5x PIX with all the comparisons to left dash. Loved the left dash distance but could NOT stand the putting feel. 

[darsony]

23 hours ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

To be clear - my objection to the Tour X is not solely performance based - it is mainly a quality control issue, as Foremost has historically been bad at producing 4 pc balls that have consistent compression and concentric layers. They do much better with 3 pc balls.

 

The performance issue that I would have with them if the QC was up to snuff - would be how they perform for me on mis-hits - which I am bound to have.  The Tour and the Tour S would not be as punishing for me.

 

To your point about the performance combination of distance off the T and spin around the green being rare - I must say that the data published last year completely supports that.  At each end of the swing speed spectrum there's only one ball that goes farther and spins more in robot testing.  Very interesting point.

Well, I can't really comment on quality control. I haven't seen any problems. I really haven't used too many balls though as I don't lose that many.  Less than 3 doz. But my experience has been that the ball still puts true after multiple rounds and maintains its ability to hit controlled straight and high long shots also after multiple rounds.  But the most miraculous things that it's cheap! It does all this and it's cheap.

[darsony]

4 hours ago, Minarets said:

I have not and probably won’t try out the X as the characteristics just aren’t what I’m looking for but have tried bout the Tour and Tour S now and I actually see very little playing difference.  Maybe if I got them on a sim but playing wise both were plenty long, spun well enough around greens.  Really the only place I can really tell a difference was with the putter.  The S does feel softer but not a ton.  I could play either happily.  
 

Im only a yellow player.  (But will play white if only a PIX). The Maxfli yellow isn’t my favorite yellow when side by side other yellows but when it’s all I’m playing on the course I like it. It’s more yellow than Titleist which is more subdued and has a tad more green to it. I much prefer that Titleist yellow.  Maxfli yellow durability isn’t as strong as Titleist either but doesn’t justify the price difference. 
 

I can happily play the Maxfli but at this point prefer the 2024 AVX. still want to play the TP5x PIX with all the comparisons to left dash. Loved the left dash distance but could NOT stand the putting feel. 

I don't really love the shade of yellow that's used either. And I didn't like that the Tour X is hard feeling and flies higher than what I was used to.  But once I saw what I gained from using it, it was very easy to ignore the little stuff. 

[JohnnyO3478]

On 2/24/2024 at 2:12 PM, darsony said:

Well, I can't really comment on quality control. I haven't seen any problems. I really haven't used too many balls though as I don't lose that many.  Less than 3 doz. But my experience has been that the ball still puts true after multiple rounds and maintains its ability to hit controlled straight and high long shots also after multiple rounds.  But the most miraculous things that it's cheap! It does all this and it's cheap.

The MGS Ball Lab report listed a 12 pt variance in compression across a sample of 36 balls.  

[JohnnyO3478]

On 2/24/2024 at 9:50 AM, Minarets said:

I have not and probably won’t try out the X as the characteristics just aren’t what I’m looking for but have tried bout the Tour and Tour S now and I actually see very little playing difference.  Maybe if I got them on a sim but playing wise both were plenty long, spun well enough around greens.  Really the only place I can really tell a difference was with the putter.  The S does feel softer but not a ton.  I could play either happily.  
 

Im only a yellow player.  (But will play white if only a PIX). The Maxfli yellow isn’t my favorite yellow when side by side other yellows but when it’s all I’m playing on the course I like it. It’s more yellow than Titleist which is more subdued and has a tad more green to it. I much prefer that Titleist yellow.  Maxfli yellow durability isn’t as strong as Titleist either but doesn’t justify the price difference. 
 

I can happily play the Maxfli but at this point prefer the 2024 AVX. still want to play the TP5x PIX with all the comparisons to left dash. Loved the left dash distance but could NOT stand the putting feel. 

Agree with most of this.  Yellow player too - and I don't mind the Maxfli shade.  I like that it IS different - and I've become quite good at spotting my ball when playing with other folks using "yellow" balls.  Wife uses and Oncore and her ball is lighter and brighter.  The Titlesist yellows are easy to discern for the reasons you stated.  And the range balls that creep out into the ninth fairway on my home course look nothing like Maxfli yellow.  TM yellow may be the closest to Max.

[JohnnyO3478]

Broke 40 for the first time ever last night:

 

 

Some of the credit:

 

[darsony]

On 2/26/2024 at 8:08 AM, JohnnyO3478 said:

The MGS Ball Lab report listed a 12 pt variance in compression across a sample of 36 balls.  

Maybe they have variances but I can't tell from usage. I'm a single digit handicap.

[JohnnyO3478]

6 hours ago, darsony said:

Maybe they have variances but I can't tell from usage. I'm a single digit handicap.

Do you never hit balls longer or shorter than you thought they should go?

[Minarets]

2 hours ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

Do you never hit balls longer or shorter than you thought they should go?

Sure. But wind, swing, contact all play factors as well, so hard to every say. 

[JohnnyO3478]

Just now, Minarets said:

Sure. But wind, swing, contact all play factors as well, so hard to every say. 

Exactly.  Why add another layer of inconsistency?  Sometimes, it's the arrow.

[Minarets]

1 hour ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

Exactly.  Why add another layer of inconsistency?  Sometimes, it's the arrow.

I’m sure it is. But it’s hard to ever tell or pinpoint the problem. It’s not obvious I should say. 

[JohnnyO3478]

16 minutes ago, Minarets said:

I’m sure it is. But it’s hard to ever tell or pinpoint the problem. It’s not obvious I should say. 

That's my point.  Eliminate as many inconsistencies as possible. If someone has demonstrated that a given product has consistency of manufacture issues - it makes sense to eliminate that product from the equation, in favor of another product that does not have the same consistency issues.  For the Tour X specifically - we are talking about an observed 12 point compression variance in a sample size of 36 balls (107 down to 95, IIRC).  And we know that compression has a direct effect on both distance and spin.  If one uses a ball that for a given set of conditions will go the same distance and spin the same amount better results should be expected, on average.  

 

For the folks who actually are suited for the benefits of a 4 pc ball - the decision is between:

 

Get the cheap one and live with the inconsistencies;

Get the expensive one - and eliminate the consistencies; or

Get the cheap 3 pc ball that's still well made and deal with the sub optimum performance and/or feel.  

 

For me - a 4 pc ball does nothing to help my game - so I'm not faced with the decision.  If I were in that boat - I'd pony up the dough for the consistenly well made ball.

[Jeff58]

As is sometimes the case with MGS, what they say and the underlying reality are not necessarily the same. The impression given can therefore be misleading.

 

First is the current model V1x. We see that the range of compression is about 93-100, and that the average deviation (standard deviation) from the average is around 3. The deviation is also very evenly distributed across the three boxes.

 

 

This is the Maxfli X. What we see are two things.

 

First, and most obvious, the second box in its entirety is 5 points higher than the other two, and that the compression change is associated with weight. What is likely here is that box 2 was manufactured at a different time, and there was a batch change in one or more of the materials.

 

The second thing we notice is that within any given box, the compression range is absurdly small. It’s essentially zero on the first box, and one on the other two. Somewhat obviously, this blows the V1x, and virtually every other ball out of the water.

 

 

 

 

The potential cause of the second box’s mean shift is not addressed whatsoever, which is unfortunate. As far as I know, there has not been an attempt to track “batch to batch” variation across time.
 

What we could take away here though, is that based on the data, as long as the balls we have in play are from the same box, they are as close to identical as exists.

[JohnnyO3478]

18 hours ago, Jeff58 said:

As is sometimes the case with MGS, what they say and the underlying reality are not necessarily the same. The impression given can therefore be misleading.

 

First is the current model V1x. We see that the range of compression is about 93-100, and that the average deviation (standard deviation) from the average is around 3. The deviation is also very evenly distributed across the three boxes.

 

 

This is the Maxfli X. What we see are two things.

 

First, and most obvious, the second box in its entirety is 5 points higher than the other two, and that the compression change is associated with weight. What is likely here is that box 2 was manufactured at a different time, and there was a batch change in one or more of the materials.

 

The second thing we notice is that within any given box, the compression range is absurdly small. It’s essentially zero on the first box, and one on the other two. Somewhat obviously, this blows the V1x, and virtually every other ball out of the water.

 

 

 

 

The potential cause of the second box’s mean shift is not addressed whatsoever, which is unfortunate. As far as I know, there has not been an attempt to track “batch to batch” variation across time.
 

What we could take away here though, is that based on the data, as long as the balls we have in play are from the same box, they are as close to identical as exists.

Some fair points.  That said - inconsistency among batches is still an inconsistency. THAT said - there appears to be a batch number stamped inside the box lids of the Maxfli Tour series balls.  You can probably QC yourself towards all balls from the same batch in a multi-box purchase if you want to flip a few lids at Dick's.  I looked at the 4 boxes of Tours that I have at the house.  They were bought on line and three lids are stamped 23200 and one is stamped 23282.  There's obviously a non-zero chance of getting different batches in an order of multiple boxes.  There you go - problem solved. Ish.

 

 

 

[darsony]

On 2/28/2024 at 6:37 AM, JohnnyO3478 said:

Do you never hit balls longer or shorter than you thought they should go?

Everybody does. I'm really not sure what you mean. Do you mean if I hit a shot that would normally go 150 sometimes it goes 155 or 145 instead? I don't really experience that. 

[darsony]

On 2/28/2024 at 10:55 AM, JohnnyO3478 said:

That's my point.  Eliminate as many inconsistencies as possible. If someone has demonstrated that a given product has consistency of manufacture issues - it makes sense to eliminate that product from the equation, in favor of another product that does not have the same consistency issues.  For the Tour X specifically - we are talking about an observed 12 point compression variance in a sample size of 36 balls (107 down to 95, IIRC).  And we know that compression has a direct effect on both distance and spin.  If one uses a ball that for a given set of conditions will go the same distance and spin the same amount better results should be expected, on average.  

 

For the folks who actually are suited for the benefits of a 4 pc ball - the decision is between:

 

Get the cheap one and live with the inconsistencies;

Get the expensive one - and eliminate the consistencies; or

Get the cheap 3 pc ball that's still well made and deal with the sub optimum performance and/or feel.  

 

For me - a 4 pc ball does nothing to help my game - so I'm not faced with the decision.  If I were in that boat - I'd pony up the dough for the consistenly well made ball.

I get what you're saying. Manufacturing problems are certainly a real thing and keeping it simpler should eliminate problems. I would guess that some of the balls I have are not perfect based on the lab tests. But I just don't see it in real life. Certainly it's not a problem. I think you'd experience it most off the driver as that's the hardest hit ball and these are just great off the tee very straight very controllable. And putting the ball I don't see problems. I'm playing on a course that has very good greens where basically if you miss the putt it's your fault not the greens.  Now I will say this if I was going to be playing for mega dollars like the professionals do I would probably play a titleist ball just because I wouldn't want to take any chances and I certainly have extreme confidence in the titleist manufacturing process.  But I don't play for that kind of money 🙂

[Morry]

2nd year with tour

Love it

 

[Mike412]

The X is the perfect one for my game just not sure I can get past the firmness, particularly with putting. Has anyone else felt that way and became okay with it? How does the firmness compare to ProV1x?

[JohnnyO3478]

23 hours ago, darsony said:

I get what you're saying. Manufacturing problems are certainly a real thing and keeping it simpler should eliminate problems. I would guess that some of the balls I have are not perfect based on the lab tests. But I just don't see it in real life. Certainly it's not a problem. I think you'd experience it most off the driver as that's the hardest hit ball and these are just great off the tee very straight very controllable. And putting the ball I don't see problems. I'm playing on a course that has very good greens where basically if you miss the putt it's your fault not the greens.  Now I will say this if I was going to be playing for mega dollars like the professionals do I would probably play a titleist ball just because I wouldn't want to take any chances and I certainly have extreme confidence in the titleist manufacturing process.  But I don't play for that kind of money 🙂

By all means - feel free to have as much inconsistency in your game as you like.  Rock on!

[Mike412]

On 6/26/2023 at 10:50 PM, Sean124 said:

The numbers are very similar in my limited testing tonight. This is what I think…

 

Driver- Too close to tell in ball speed and spin

7 iron- Trend seemed to be a couple hundred less rpm with the Tour X

PW- Too close to tell

 

I’m absolutely convinced I prefer the feel of the Tour X. I’m playing again tomorrow so I’ll test more on the course where it really matters. 

Curious if you have any follow up to this?

[Sean124]

8 hours ago, Mike412 said:

Curious if you have any follow up to this?

Not really lol

 

Here’s my problem. I want a ball that performs like the ProV1 but feels like the ProV1X.
 

I hadn’t been playing the CSX for long and honestly didn’t give the Maxfli much of a chance either. I was perfectly happy with the ‘21 ProV1 but was searching because I really don’t like the feel of the ‘23. 
 

I ended up ordering a whole sh!tload of ‘21 ProV1 from those lost ball sites in mint condition for $25-30 per dozen and am still playing those. 

[Ben B]

For those who have put in the testing....how is the spin on 3/4 to full wedge shots (PW, GW, SW) comparing the Tour vs X?

 

I have played a few rounds with the X and really like it but the 3/4 to full wedge shots are spinning too much for my liking. To be clear, my "full" wedge shot isn't really full...I never take a full swing at a wedge. I perfer the ball to land and simply check up, maybe spin back a hair. However, I have found with the X that my wedges are landing and spinning back 10 plus feet...sometimes 15 plus. During the hot dry summer months when greens are difficult to hold that wouldn't be a bad thing but I am not liking it too much. I think it may be a combination of the higher trajectory and high spin. Is the regular Tour that less spinning and low trajectory? Don't really want to buy a whole box, but I guess I could and just use them in the sim if I don't like them. 

 

Otherwise, I love the ball. Really performs well. 

[JohnnyO3478]

16 hours ago, Ben B said:

For those who have put in the testing....how is the spin on 3/4 to full wedge shots (PW, GW, SW) comparing the Tour vs X?

 

I have played a few rounds with the X and really like it but the 3/4 to full wedge shots are spinning too much for my liking. To be clear, my "full" wedge shot isn't really full...I never take a full swing at a wedge. I perfer the ball to land and simply check up, maybe spin back a hair. However, I have found with the X that my wedges are landing and spinning back 10 plus feet...sometimes 15 plus. During the hot dry summer months when greens are difficult to hold that wouldn't be a bad thing but I am not liking it too much. I think it may be a combination of the higher trajectory and high spin. Is the regular Tour that less spinning and low trajectory? Don't really want to buy a whole box, but I guess I could and just use them in the sim if I don't like them. 

 

Otherwise, I love the ball. Really performs well. 

My full sand wedge shots usually are found to be sitting within a yard and a half or so of where they land on the green - using Tour.  PW is probably within 2, 3 max and usually in the direction of the contour of the green.  I do not recall the X acting much differently for me.  My full wedge shots are probably 72 mph club speed - tops.  

Edited March 6 by JohnnyO3478

[hammergolf]

On 2/26/2024 at 7:08 AM, JohnnyO3478 said:

The MGS Ball Lab report listed a 12 pt variance in compression across a sample of 36 balls.  

I read their ball reviews, but what would be really interesting would be if they robot tested the balls that have a significant compression, weight, or size variance to see what the actual performance difference may be. I think it would be very slight, but the data would be cool to see.