Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5556 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted
Please recommend a low trajectory ball for 90 mph driver speed. The reason that I want a low trajectory ball is that I break my left wrist at impact (flipping) and as a result my ball trajectory is very high. I am hoping that a low trajectory ball will give me some extra distance.

In addition there are a few other requirements:
1. Under $25
2. Soft
3. Less spin for driver accuracy

I have been playing with the Srixon AD333 but thought there might be better balls out there.
Thanks,

Posted
Have you looked at the Bridgestone e7? They're $27, but it's just $2 more.

I would personally recommend checking out lostgolfballs.com. You'll find lots of threads with good reviews on this forum. It is one avenue to play a better ball at a lower price point.

What's in my Titleist Lightweight Cart Bag that sits on my Clic Gear 3.0 Push Cart:
Driver TaylorMade Tour Burner 10.5° Fujikura SuperFast Stiff
3W TaylorMade Burner 15° TM REAX Stiff
Hybrid Cobra Baffler Rail H 19° Fujikura Motore Stiff
Irons TaylorMade  R7 3-PWWedges Cleveland CG14 52°.10 and...


Posted
I break my left wrist at impact (flipping) and as a result my ball trajectory is very high.

Don't do that.

Mizuno MP600 driver, Cleveland '09 Launcher 3-wood, Callaway FTiz 18 degree hybrid, Cleveland TA1 3-9, Scratch SS8620 47, 53, 58, Cleveland Classic 2 mid-mallet, Bridgestone B330S, Sun Mountain four5.


Posted
the golf ball isn't going to make that much of a difference.

It's more about technique.....

My Clubs
Driver - LV4 10* R flex
Wood - sam snead persimmon 2 wood (for windy days)
Hybrid burner tour launch 20* stiff flex.
Irons - Tour Mode 3i,4i stiffIrons - FP's 5-PW R-flexWedge - spin milled 54.14Wedge - spin milled 60.07Putter - Victoria Lowest round 2010: 79 (par 70)Latest rounds at...


Posted
If you're flipping, correct that first.


Second...if your clubhead (I'm assuming...because if your ball speed is 90 mph...no equipment's going to help much besides protein and a weight bench) speed is 90mph, you dont' want a ball that's going to go LOWER. At that speed, you want a high-launch, mid-level ball. You DON'T want a low-launch, tour ball because you're p*ssing away distance with that clubhead speed and a tour-performance, low-launch ball.

I would worry about your swing, then your equipment, THEN your ball.

The AD333 is a good ball. I've used some that I got from a buddy on days when the greens at my home course get soft. They fly a MILE, don't spin much, but feel good off the face. Stick with that ball and fix your swing.

Current Gear Setup: Driver: TM R9 460, 9.5, Stiff - 3W: TM R9, 15, stiff - Hybrid: Adams Idea Pro Black, 18, stiff - Irons: Callaway X Forged 09, 3-PW, PX 5.5 - SW: Callaway X Series Jaws, 54.14 - LW: Callaway X Series Jaws, 60.12 - Putter: PING Redwood Anser, 33in.


Posted
If you're flipping, correct that first.

He didn't say his ball speed is 90 mph, he said his

driver speed is 90. The assumption is that he's talking clubhead speed. When I did the Bridgestone ball fitting I was told that I was getting too much spin with the Nike PD soft off the driver.... over 5000 rpm. Switching to the E6 brought that down to under 3500 and a better trajectory (my SS is also in the 90-95 range). But the E6 isn't a soft ball by any means, so I don't know if there is a real cure for him just with a different ball, not if he is that particular about it being soft. Softer balls will usually spin more, and that results in a higher trajectory.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Yes, I should say that my clubhead speed for the driver is 90 mph resulting in about 230 yards (roll+carry). Wow, Nike PD soft to E6 reduced your spin rate by 1500 rpm? I might try the E6. I have tried to correct my flipping habit but it is not easy.

Posted
I have about a 95 mph swing and I switched from the Pro V to the Bridgestone E7 and shot the best round of my life the next day. Lol, I know it sounds like a cheesy commercial, but it really happened. I would give the E7 a shot, what's the worst that can happen? My drives are like low rockets now, not nearly as high even with a 10.5 degree driver.

Scott

Note: This thread is 5556 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.