less dimples .... less side spin ?

[Shanks A Million]

The Tri-speed is Srixon's mid-level three piece ball. The AD333 is a two piece distance ball (meaning low spin across the board). I don't think ball cover material has much to do with spin off the driver. It's with your wedges and irons that have deep aggressive grooves that a softer cover material is able to dig into the grooves and produce more spin.

That's actually a myth. Some studies were done, and they found that the cover is more important than anything else in generating spin. The difference between smooth faces, and faces with grooves was minimal with clean contact. The surlyn balls spun less with and without grooves, while the elastomer balls spun more with or without grooves. Where the grooves come into play is when there's stuff in between the club and ball, the grooves can help channel it away from the face. There is some "bite" from the grooves, but on a clean fairway, it's minimal.

[Chief Broom]

That's actually a myth.

Interesting. It makes sense the e5 is all about more spin, and a ball that spins more will naturally have a higher trajectory off the driver (backspin creating lift). It's interesting to note that high spin balls actually have a lower trajectory off of wedges (and I guess irons) because they interact with the club face sooner. Harder balls slide up the face more and are launched higher. You'd think in that case the higher backspin rate would cause the ball to climb more but I suppose that isn't as much a factor as the higher launch angle?

[Cornbread]

I seem to recall that the Gamer-V2 was the only non-urethane ball that even approached the spin rates of the urethane balls.

Actually the Gamer V2 spins less than the original Gamer. It was the one close to Urethane spin rates, not the V2..

[Cornbread]

Interesting. It makes sense the e5 is all about more spin, and a ball that spins more will naturally have a higher trajectory off the driver (backspin creating lift).

Actually the e5 is a low spin ball off of a Driver. Its spin comes from the Urethane cover on short iron shots, but still only rated a Meduim spin Iron ball by the USGA.

[Shanks A Million]

Interesting. It makes sense the e5 is all about more spin, and a ball that spins more will naturally have a higher trajectory off the driver (backspin creating lift). It's interesting to note that high spin balls actually have a lower trajectory off of wedges (and I guess irons) because they interact with the club face sooner. Harder balls slide up the face more and are launched higher. You'd think in that case the higher backspin rate would cause the ball to climb more but I suppose that isn't as much a factor as the higher launch angle?

The reason the higher spin balls launch lower is indeed because they have more traction, as opposed to sliding up the face. The face determines about 85% of the initial direction of the ball, but urethane balls' initial direction is closer to path, where as the surlyn balls are closer to face. So, if the face determined 80% of the initial angle for an elastomer ball, it may account for 90% of the initial direction of a surlyn ball.

Actually the e5 is a low spin ball off of a Driver. Its spin comes from the Urethane cover on short iron shots, but still only rated a Meduim spin Iron ball by the USGA.

So far, you've made quite a number of posts about golf balls in multiple threads, and they've all been shown to be wrong. Why you continue to fight the issue is beyond me. You provide exactly zero proof to back up your claims, just a "trust me" promise. That's not good enough. Show us some proof.

[CoolBreeze20]

Actually the e5 is a low spin ball off of a Driver. Its spin comes from the Urethane cover on short iron shots, but still only rated a Meduim spin Iron ball by the USGA.

Did that USGA study you keep referencing not discern between what 2-piece and 3-piece balls are, or are you just ignoring being proven wrong in exactly the same fashion as you accused someone else?

[Cornbread]

I don't see that anyone has proven me to be incorrect? I don't post anything without first confirming my memory via documented test results (from various sources, including the USGA, and the R&A;).

My only error was recently stating that the AD333 was a 3 piece ball. I was going from test data memory which showed it to spin more from both driver and Short irons than the Trispeed (a 3 piece). Thus I was thinking it to be a 3 piece as well. This is a case in point that a 2 piece ball can perform as well as more exspensive 3 piece balls. Just because a ball is constructed with more layers (pieces) does not mean that it will spin more than a ball with less layers. In general, it usually does, but certainly not in every case/comparison. Being that I am an engineer, with a engineers brain, I generally find it difficult to overlook random inaccurate statements from uneducated golf ball consumers. If you truly care to learn and understand the actions and interactions action of Golf Balls you will spend years researching and testing products just as I have.

So far, you've made quite a number of posts about golf balls in multiple threads, and they've all been shown to be wrong. Why you continue to fight the issue is beyond me. You provide exactly zero proof to back up your claims, just a "trust me" promise. That's not good enough. Show us some proof.

If you in fact know me to be incorrect why must I provide proof? Seems you are the one who is uncertain.

Some additional facts for your consumption... Recent Groove Test conducted by the USGA (for the New Groove Rule) found that with the new grooves the difference in spin rates for Urethane vs Non-Urethane balls is greatly reduced. For example, with the old grooves the spin difference may have been 30%, but with the new grooves its down to like 10% difference. Bottom line, if you using the new grooves, urethane covered balls are much less reactive (important). from the test finding : "The test results demonstrated that there is an appreciable difference in spin rate achieved with players using U-grooved clubs with urethane covered balls over spin rates with V-grooved clubs. The U-groove club and urethane covered ball combination consistently achieved higher spin rates, and this was most apparent at the 8-iron loft. However, there is only a minimal difference in spin rates achieved by golfers when using U- and V-grooved clubs in combination with surlyn covered balls. This type of ball makes up approximately 70% of the golf balls sold at on- and off-course retailers2. These tests also demonstrate that the spin performance of a urethane covered ball in concert with a V-groove has very little advantage over a Surlyn covered ball with either groove configuration. "

[Cornbread]

Did that USGA study you keep referencing not discern between what 2-piece and 3-piece balls are, or are you just ignoring being proven wrong in exactly the same fashion as you accused someone else?

Yes it did discern. As I noted above, just because a ball is composted of more layers/peices doesn not make it a better nor higher spinning ball. Most times is does, but certainly not in each case.

[Shanks A Million]

Yes it did discern. As I noted above, just because a ball is composted of more layers/peices doesn not make it a better nor higher spinning ball. Most times is does, but certainly not in each case.

So, what you're trying to tell us, is that a 2 peice distance ball with a surlyn cover spins more than a 3 peice ball with an elastomer cover. You've provided no more evidence than "this is what I say, and you should believe me." Still not buying it.