I Weighed 100 Golf Balls and Here's What I Found

[Bonvivant]

40 minutes ago, TRUCKER said:

🤔...This concerns me a little. I have 200+ prov1/prov1x/avx, and another 100+ tour level balls, (bridgestone, tm, snell, Srixon, etc), that I've found. They're like brand new, but who knows how old. Also, I will play the same ball 100 +/- holes sometimes until I lose it, or bruise it. Are you saying I could be losing 10-15 yards playing these used/old age balls as opposed to starting with a brand new ball every round?

Thats the idea. It depends on how much mass is missing from the ball, and how bad the dimples are. The OP didn't make it clear as to how bad the lowest quality balls were though. The grooves on irons and wedges would create the most mass/dimple loss.

One of the interesting things about this is that it is untestable on a LM because its looking at speeds, spins etc. And has no clue how much mass the ball has. I'm sure that there is a set "mass" in the simulator software. It would be interesting to see a LM setup with a scale for the ball, that corrects the physics in the sim for the exact ball that you have.

As far as water wear, I don't think you would lose much mass just sitting around in a pond, so those results aren't surprising to me.

BTW I'm not a golf ball scientist or physicist or anything. I'm just applying logic to the problem and numbers could be inaccurate. One of the reason I am so sure that an older ball won't fly as far as a new one is the same reason that a golf ball doesn't fly as far on a 0C day than on a 30C day. Density of the air vs mass of the ball (+aerodynamics) 

[TRUCKER]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

That test was also conducted by a site selling found golf balls (https://golfballdivers.com). So… take it with a grain of salt.

A PHD from Michigan ran the study. It seems pretty legit. I get your point though.

[TRUCKER]

Found another test done on used balls (not water balls) vs. new. Again no difference in distance or performance. 

[Bonvivant]

3 minutes ago, TRUCKER said:

Found another test done on used balls (not water balls) vs. new. Again no difference in distance or performance. 

Tested on a LM? Because that will not account for mass or aerodynamics. 

[TRUCKER]

What difference does it make? The results are the only thing that matters.

[Bonvivant]

1 minute ago, TRUCKER said:

What difference does it make? The results are the only thing that matters.

The difference is that the LM will not show the types of things that would cause a loss of distance. The balls will have the same compression and similar spin rates (maybe a couple hundred rpms less from a mid iron). The air will slow a ball with less mass down faster than a full mass ball.

If you are still playing well with the ball, then keep playing it, but know that it is possible that you are losing distance due to insufficient mass/reduced aerodynamics from dimple wear. 

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, TRUCKER said:

What difference does it make? The results are the only thing that matters.

As @Bonvivant said, launch monitors will often read the first 30 or 40 yards of a ball's flight and calculate the rest.

[TRUCKER]

Ok I see what your saying now. But wouldn't that mean a LM gives false reads then?

[Bonvivant]

3 minutes ago, TRUCKER said:

Ok I see what your saying now. But wouldn't that mean a LM gives false reads then?

Yes when it comes to a result that is accurate to real life application. Launch monitors are great for tuning to optimize launch conditions, hence the name. They are also good for realizing increases in speed, and improvment in distance based on launch. 

[Bonvivant]

46 minutes ago, iacas said:

As @Bonvivant said, launch monitors will often read the first 30 or 40 yards of a ball's flight and calculate the rest.

They can't even read that if you are indoors. The net/screen is never more than 5-10 yards away at places I've seen

[dennyjones]

2 hours ago, TRUCKER said:

Ok I googled it and found an answer. There's basically no difference in performance of a brand new ball, tested against a ball that was recovered from a water hazard. They tested balls that were placed in the water for 1/3/5 months. Then tested them against a brand new version and found "maybe" a 1% difference. The balls used in this independent research were prov1.

I can't be the definitive response but I once purchased used  AAAA Taylormade balls from Amazon.   There was a very noticable difference. I will only play with a new golf ball.

[iacas]

57 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

They can't even read that if you are indoors. The net/screen is never more than 5-10 yards away at places I've seen

I know. 🙂

[Bonvivant]

Just now, iacas said:

I know. 🙂

Wasn't trying to question you. Just figured that most people that get a chance to get on LMs are doing it indoors, so it is rarely reading the first 30 yards, even if the monitor is capable. Do you have a certain time that you retire a ball? New one each round? Just curious. I lose far too many to be picky, personally, although there is a professional 90 that is lurking in my bag at the moment and I always avoid it, lol.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Bonvivant
spelling

[Bonvivant]

@TRUCKER 

How Do Used Golf Balls Perform vs New?

---

Research by Oakland University researchers shows that the...

 

This article shows significant loss from pond balls. Just because they say almost identical doesn't mean it is. 14 yards of total distance is at least a club for anyone. Semi off topic but shows you what can happen

Edited December 5, 2019 by Bonvivant

[Asheville]

4 hours ago, TRUCKER said:

A PHD from Michigan ran the study. It seems pretty legit. I get your point though.

Some time ago, PHDs told us that smoking cigarettes was good for us.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Bonvivant said:

@TRUCKER 

How Do Used Golf Balls Perform vs New?

---

Research by Oakland University researchers shows that the...

This article shows significant loss from pond balls. Just because they say almost identical doesn't mean it is. 14 yards of total distance is at least a club for anyone. Semi off topic but shows you what can happen

Did you link to the right study? I don't see what you're seeing.

[TRUCKER]

1 hour ago, Bonvivant said:

@TRUCKER 

How Do Used Golf Balls Perform vs New?

---

Research by Oakland University researchers shows that the...

 

This article shows significant loss from pond balls. Just because they say almost identical doesn't mean it is. 14 yards of total distance is at least a club for anyone. Semi off topic but shows you what can happen

The biggest difference in performance from all the pond ball testing I referenced was 1 yard. Most were 1/2 yard or less. It was done from the same school you're referencing. So I don't know where you found that.

48 minutes ago, iacas said:

Did you link to the right study? I don't see what you're seeing.

👌

[dennyjones]

Well now I went and done it.  I emailed Dr. Thomas Raffel asking about the study.  I linked to this thread.   

 

From what I saw, it was just an advertisement for waterlogged golf balls.