2009 titleist - an admision of real gimmicks or real science?

[scotte]

If the 2009 titleist works just as good at the 2007 does this mean that the features removed were were basically worthless gimickss? I mean if they were real science wouldn't that mean that the 2009 v1 should perform worse than the 2007?

 

Thanks for any help on this.

 

Scott

[xTitLiEsT_ToURx]

all i know is..the new 09 ball is totallllly different than the old models.. since getting sued by callaway, titliest made this new pro-v1 with a MUCH thicker cover. it actually doesnt feel anything like the old pro-v1's because its actually harder and less receptive. alot of the guys playing this new ball on tour have been saying that they dont like the feel of it and it is not as soft as the old ball. some even switched ball companies

[sleded]

So, all the tour winners with new Pro V1's everwhere were just planted? The cover is the same thickness, the new ball spins less on full shots, by design, its what the players wanted. That is why a lot played the '05x, it spun much less than the '07.

 

What they got sued for was a manufacturing process, not a component or design, or material of the ball. I will play Titleist more than ever now, the new versions are incredible, and if you want to play a ball that is clicky, go elsewhere I guess. I'm sick of the Titleist bashing, Callaway deserves bashing too for not defending their patents, advertising methods, etc. If you can't beat them, tear them down is their method to try to gain market share. There have been golf ball suits for years now. Titleist won a bunch of money from Maxfli years ago for the cover on the Revolution ball.

[jaskanski]

So, if any company brings out a newer "improved" model of anything - be it a driver or iron set or ball - does that automatically render the previous model a gimmick? Since Callaway are claiming that it was their technology anyway, it just makes them look stupid by that logic. If that were really the case, then why aren't Callaway producing a ball indentical to the old pro V with their branding on it? I mean, surely they'd clean up on sales because it's the technology right? Or maybe Titleist can sell anything with their name (and reputation) on it.

[hogans71]

all i know is..the new 09 ball is totallllly different than the old models.. since getting sued by callaway, titliest made this new pro-v1 with a MUCH thicker cover. it actually doesnt feel anything like the old pro-v1's because its actually harder and less receptive. alot of the guys playing this new ball on tour have been saying that they dont like the feel of it and it is not as soft as the old ball. some even switched ball companies

 

Well, according to this article... not so much.

 

 

http://www.golf.com/golf/equipment/article...1881071,00.html

[xTitLiEsT_ToURx]

i suppose i didnt do my research....the cover thing was just something i heard... i had the impression that callaway sued titliest because of a patten on a ball cover callaway had..that titliest later used.... im not sure if the cover is really any thicker than the old pro-v1's but from playin them myself i think they arent as soft as the old one..ive played pro-vs for years and by far are my favorite ball :good:

[DPackers]

The lawsuit came because the Pro-V1 is a reverse engineered Top Flite Strata. Callaway owns the rights to the Strata....thus lawsuit. If you all remember when Mark O'Meara got real hot back around 2000 he was the first to switch to the Strata. Never considered a long player he started out driving many players and still stopped the ball on a dime. Titleist only had wound balls at the time and no technology for a 3 piece solid core golf ball. They then reverse engineered the Strata and the Pro-V1 was born. It has advanced since the original days of the Strata but when the engine for the golf ball is deemed infringed that is never good.