• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ClayHbg

Nike Vapor Black underrated???

7 posts in this topic

Each year I seem to fall into my annual process of testing the newest mid-level balls (approximately $20-35) to find my "gamer" for that year.  This year was no exception.  At this point my wallet and handicap don't call for a tour ball and I can't seem to put them in the fairway to begin with.  This Spring, based on reviews, I decided to buy and test the Top Flite Gamer, Bridgestone e6, Srixon Q-Star, and Nike Vapor Blacks.

All are obviously great balls although I didn't like the feel of the Q-Star at all.  The Bridgestone was incredibly straight but when I wanted/need to work the ball it all fell apart for me.  I either couldn't get ball to draw at all or I would hook it OB.  There was no happy medium for me.

My best results came from the Gamers and the Vapor Blacks.  Both balls were equally long and extrememly straight.  The Vapors allowed me to work the ball a little more while the Gamers had a little more spin around the greens.  I'd play either of these balls anytime without any hesitation whatsoever.  My question is whether others have had comparable experiences with the Nikes?  The Gamers get a lot of pub as being one of the best, affordable balls out there while the Nike Vapor Blacks seem to be a little overlooked.  Thoughts?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Although I don't play at the same level as you, for the mid range balls, I think the vapor black is excellent. I tried out a dozen 2 months ago when I ran out of my usual balls and although I can work the ball like you are talking about yet, the feel of them off the irons was great, distance was exceptional for me, and when I did get a good wedge on them to the green, they stopped decently for me. The only thing I didn't like about them was they were soft off the putter for me. The NXT Tour S jumps off the putter for me as does the Pro V1 if I play them on a whim but the Nike was slower so that part threw my game off a bit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It`s funny but I found one of these on the third hole last week. I threw it in my pocket and didnt think about it until a few holes later when I wanted a throw away for a water hole . I ended up playing it for the rest of the day and was quite happy with it`s performance all over . I am going to purchase some today and make the switch

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see I'm not the only one.  The Vaprs don't seem to get the same amount of hype as the Gamers, Srixons, or Bridgestones but they feel great and they're just a great ball all-around.  And the fact that Dick's usually has them on sale for $20 a dozen doesn't hurt either.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.. maybe this should be my new ball... so far every nike I've hit I've hated. Mojos were good way back when.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive tired the Vapor Black and IMO its nothing to get excited about.  Id compare it to a Bstone E6 or Titleist NXT.  Decent ball for the price but too low-spin for my liking.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought 2 dozen of these for the upcoming season. Never used them before. I am anxious to try a new ball as I have never really loved the current ball(Srixon q star) I used all of last year. Any updates from the other posters since you played them last season? Thanks
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Golf Evolution
  • Posts

    • GAME GOLF - Digital Tracking System
      Well, I went ahead and bit. Amazon Warehouse Deals has a few for $86 each. I had a $25 Amazon GC from Christmas, so after tax, it's going to be $66. It says the packaging is damaged, but no mention of problems with the device. Here's hoping it comes in good shape, and that it warms up pretty quickly so I can use it!
    • "5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge (February 2016)
      The tournament I was supposed to play in was cancelled , so I played in a shotgun start today. The group I was in played at a quicker pace than the group in front and the group behind us, so I had plenty of opportunities for practicing greenside chipping and bunker shots as well as putting.
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      While I expect it's largely accurate, I was more interested in a link to the actual quote than your paraphrase. The context of the question and interview plus the exact wording gives a clearer understanding of the statement. I accept deeper field of talent, I don't accept that it's automatically 'a ton' or an order of magnitude greater. What's the average score relative to the field (or % making the cut) in the PGA for the Pros vs. the PGA qualifiers from then to now? That could provide some insight to relative gap between majors field depth then and now. I am certain it's gotten harder for the PGA qualifiers to make it tot he weekend. I am less certain by how much the margin has shifted. The reason I stress the Majors and Opens is that size of field and openness to qualifiers is very important in making the top competitors face many elite players with potential to have a hot run of form. You're comparing apples to oranges there. That was ~ 1.5 million players in the U.S., not the world population of golfers. About 26 million golfers today in the U.S. Worldwide in 1920 who knows? But including Europe, Australia, and other 'commonwealth' countries it was likely double that - maybe triple. Also I can find no credible estimate that supports 100 million current golfers worldwide. Most generous is about 61 million. While there are a lot of clubs world-wide, participation of 'casual' unaffiliated golfers per club is not going to be the same as in the U.S. and that's the only way I get a number close to 100 million based on actual data. U.S. golf population talent base roughly tripled between Jack and Tiger and I expect worldwide it was a similar rate of increase. I think since the 1920's the U.S. has had about half the wold golf population, though that's started to decline of late as Asian participation increases. Jack was head and shoulders above highly competitive fields for nearly a generation similar to Tiger. I don't think human abilities change by orders of magnitude in short spans of time so I expect that Jack was an outlier of similar human ability as Tiger. How close and who has the edge is IMO debatable. Were Tiger's achievements (esp. the 'beat the field' streak) tougher than Jack's because of field depth, yes. How much more I'm not as sure as you. Did a relative 'competitive break' from full field events offered by the WGC's help Tiger there? Don't know but it's possible. Combine Tiger's regular wins and Majors and I have no problem giving him the greatest player of all time nod. I just don't think it's as cut and dried or by as large a margin as you seem to. They didn't play against each other so your confidence isn't any more a fact than my uncertainty. We're both estimating. Size of the field actually competing matters too, not just who wasn't invited to the party. I like the idea of a top player field and enjoy watching the events, but if only the top 50 players are playing they all have a better shot statistically than if the field was open to 156 or more players who are still very 'elite' in skill. As you've said in many posts, golf skill performance is highly variable. I agree and that's why I think size of field is relevant to the comparison, because I think the scoring variability of the top 90 golfers in the world overlaps considerably with the next 90 down and even a bit beyond that. That's why I wondered whether WGC wins are a bit less valuable than a major or a full field PGA tour event that's also open to Monday qualifying. Granted the world ranking system is better than it used to be, but it still weights international events more strongly than they deserve. Some of the reasons I think you may be undervaluing Nicklaus' achievement in comparing across eras.
    • "5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge (January 2016)
      I managed to complete the January challenge (without missing a day, I believe). It was a great months' work for my game - having to blog every day sure helps to focus each session.
    • Steel vs Graphite generic question
      S300 is one of the lowest launching steel shafts.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today
  • Blog Entries