Is there anyplace to get comparisons between different balls?

[misty_mountainhop]

Don't suppose they have info on the Taylor Made Burner TP do they? Cheers.

[Stacey_E]

Don't suppose they have info on the Taylor Made Burner TP do they? Cheers.

They sure enough do.

Taylor Made Burner TP 255.4 / 10,894 / NA Taylor Made Burner 255.4 / 9,242 / NA Anymore?

[st0wgolf08]

Here’s how the Golf Magazine’s Feb 2008 ball guide tested the balls available to them:

Isn't the smash factor of that a little high? That equates to like 1.52, and from what I've read that anything over 1.4 is pretty good. I even read somewhere that you can't go over 1.49, so idk how accurate the testing is, again I don't know much about smash factor just stating what I read.

Edit: The smash of the driver, not the wedge.

[Stacey_E]

Isn't the smash factor of that a little high? That equates to like 1.52, and from what I've read that anything over 1.4 is pretty good. I even read somewhere that you can't go over 1.49, so idk how accurate the testing is, again I don't know much about smash factor just stating what I read.

Sure that does seem like a high smash factor. Another thing to consider is that even if your robot had a swing speed of exactly 90 on every shot with a perfect smash factor (what ever that may be)...I really don't see how each and every ball would be 137 mph because of design differences. But these are the numbers they quote. Maybe they tweaked the swing speed on each ball until they got a 137 mph ball?

The important thing to me in their stats is that there is not a great difference in total length of the driver between the longest and shortest ball on the market. If you don't count the Nike Platinum, the longest ball in production is only 12 yards longer than the shortest ball in produstion (of the ones that were tested). So to me, the spin specs become so much more important. This stat is important both for golfers looking for greenside performance as well as deciding the best ball for their full swing shots...you know, slicers needing less spin, low ballers needing more spin and such.

[Pat007]

Q: Is there anyplace to get comparisons between different balls?

A: Just ask your wife!!




HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Made you laugh!

[steve617]

How about the Nike PD Soft

[Stacey_E]

How about the Nike PD Soft

Nike PD Soft 255.9 / 8,888 / NA Next?

[worst_shot_ever]

OK, how about the Titlist Tour Balata 90? Ha!

[anthonykim3]

precept laddie x if the as good as the one guy on the forum that is a 4.6 says i might have to try them for 28 dollars for 24

[Stacey_E]

precept laddie x if the as good as the one guy on the forum that is a 4.6 says i might have to try them for 28 dollars for 24

precept laddie x 256.0 / 6,242 / 67 So that ties it for the second hardest cover in all the industry. It is deffinately a low spinning ball.

[anthonykim3]

wow this guy said he couldn't fell the diffrence between this and prov1

[Stacey_E]

I saw the thread. I feel for him.

To me, this ball plays almost exactly like a Callaway HX Hot (not the Bite). It was for sure a long ball. But that was all it had going for it. Playing the HX Hot was the only time ever that I was across the green more than on it or short. Then when I tried to chip back on, I had a hard time controlling the ball. And the long par putts were especially hard to even lag because there was no feel whatsover. But you could hit it off 4 trees and the cartpath and not scratch it one bit. I guess that's a KINDA good thing?