range balls vs real balls experiment results

[Yukari]

I think you folks are being kind of tough on Gilberg.  He is asking an honest question about how range balls perform relative to non-range ball with regard to distance.   The answer is, in general and on average, range balls are shorter given the same launch parameters.  If you hit a real ball with your 5 iron it might go 410 feet.  Also I wonder where Gilberg got his handicap index.   I have never seen a USGA handicap index with a hundredth digit.  I would think this just a typing error except if your teaching Pro thinks you're close to professional status then your index couldn't be 20.2.  I guess the other thing about the post that bothered me was if you have an index close to 2 and hit a 5 iron around 133 yards, you must have a short game to behold and Phil will probably be calling for advice.

I thought we were all answering in the same manner as Gilberg so that he can easily understand. No?

Clearly, HI with the hundredth digit means Gilberg is more consistent than mere mortals.  In fact, I wish mine only had the significant digit of one's or even 10's as my score can range from the 70's to the 90's.  With the hundredth digit significant figure, I am guessing his score only varies +/- 2 or 3 at best.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveP043

oops, i just now realized i should have phoneticized it.....Does the speedo in your CAH read out...

Yeah. I drive wicked fast on the way to the course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wally Fairway

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

I measure distances in furlongs.

that seems rather amatuerish - I gauge my shots on the range in hang time vs. distance.

Something like this -

Driver - 3 Mississippi's

3 wood - 2 Mississippi's and a Mississ

3 hybrid - 3 Oklahoma's

4 iron - 3 Virginia's

5 iron - 3 Arkansas

6 iron - 3 Florida's

and then I have to practice my Tiger topped 3 wood and that is 1/2 of an Oh Shit

Excellent system.  I suppose that Tiger's shot would be measured in smaller increments like Rhode Islands.

It takes a tad longer for me to say Rhode Island, than Mississippi. 10 times in a row 6 seconds for Mississippi and 7 for Rhode Island. . .

True, but if you went with the State nickname, "Rhody", then it would work out.

Wow, still kind of a "tongue twister", but took off 2 seconds.

BTW, What's the difference between a person who lives there and the name of the state? Are they both called the same thing?

Someone from Rhode Island is a "Rhode Islander".  That's too long though for this method.  The State nickname is Little Rhody.  BTW, I love RI.  It is a gem of a state.

[colin007]

Rhode Island is the cubic zirconia of state gems.

[natureboy]

And I wouldn't dare take lessons from someone who couldn't guess my weight

Or read my palm for swing flaws.

This should be the kinky thread on this message board. Everything else is extraneous.

BTW I measure my distances in parsecs

That'd be attoparsecs or rather yoctoparsecs.

I was initially going to say megaparsecs, but Lihu beat me. Perhaps given your prodigious ball speed it should be measured in redshift.

[Lihu]

[QUOTE name="RandallT" url="/t/82859/range-balls-vs-real-balls-experiment-results/36#post_1161514"] And I wouldn't dare take lessons from someone who couldn't guess my weight[/QUOTE] Or read my palm for swing flaws. [QUOTE name="colin007" url="/t/82859/range-balls-vs-real-balls-experiment-results/36#post_1161651"] This should be the kinky thread on this message board. Everything else is extraneous. BTW I measure my distances in parsecs[/QUOTE] [QUOTE name="Lihu" url="/t/82859/range-balls-vs-real-balls-experiment-results/36#post_1161653"] That'd be attoparsecs or rather yoctoparsecs. :-D [/QUOTE] I was initially going to say megaparsecs, but Lihu beat me. Perhaps given your prodigious ball speed it should be measured in redshift.

The relativistic speeds could alter time WRT the ball, and possibly take a few strokes off they next shot by going into the relative past? :w00t: Yeah, megaparsecs would certainly require good aim so you don't hit any objects in space. Might take longer than the potential age of the universe to reach a mega parsec at 170mph, though. . . :-D

[natureboy]

The relativistic speeds could alter time WRT the ball, and possibly take a few strokes off they next shot by going into the relative past?

Yeah, megaparsecs would certainly require good aim so you don't hit any objects in space. Might take longer than the potential age of the universe to reach a mega parsec at 170mph, though. . .

Yeah, but depends a bit on whether the Hubble constant is actually constant in all spacetime and/or if there is a cosmological constant. While current observations indicate a hyperbolic / saddle shaped universe, I personally favor a phase-shift occuring waaay down the road to a spherical geometry and a big crunch - big bang cycle.

So either way once Colin got his escape velocity down there'd probably be loads of time, but he'd have to give the Andromeda hazard a wide berth.

[colin007]

I routinely carry the Andromeda Hazard on the fly.

[Mac62]

I routinely carry the Andromeda Hazard on the fly.

So Alpha Centauri is barely even a lob wedge for you, then? I don't know the distance in feet, but it's a whole bunch of Mississippis.

[natureboy]

I routinely carry the Andromeda Hazard on the fly.

Yeah, it's only about 3/4 of a Mpc carry but I was considering the fairly wide dark matter gravity well which could create a relative hook or slice if you strayed too close.

@Mac62 Isn't that around a google Rhode Islands?

[Lihu]

So, I hit balls at the driving range today, and noticed that the balls were carrying really short. The balls themselves were soaking wet. The temperature was a little less than 58F and the air was cold and damp, but the balls were going about 25 yards less than I expected on my drives.

The variation in air temperature which is about:

226 -------105

224 ------- 95
222 ------- 85
220 ------- 75
216 ------- 65
214 ------- 55
205 ------- 45
196 ------- 35

For the temperature in question is is only 221-215 or 6 yards.

I took out my Disto 810, and measured the bounce height off a smooth and clean spot in the pavement. 10 of the range balls bounced from 34 to 38 inches on 3 trials each. Yes, I looked like a total nerd on the range. In any case, I took the ProV1x from my bag and did the same thing and all three balls bounced to 40 inches within an 1 inch or so. The COR is sqrt(h/H) where h is the bounce back height and H is the drop height. I calculated the range balls to have a COR of 0.775 while my proV1 were right about 0.8165 which accounts for about 5.4% distance variation. On my drives this translates to about 12-13 yards.

So, temperature and COR loss account for only 18-19 yards of lost distance not 25 yards or so.

Could the damp conditions could account for the remaining yards lost? Or maybe it was the fact that the balls were soaking wet as if they sat in a vat of water overnight which also influenced flight? Or both?

Not sure what the remaining 6-7 yards could be from?

[ChrisWev]

Damp could be resistance on the ball, would be interesting to see if it effected ballspeed at all just after impact?

[Lihu]

Damp could be resistance on the ball, would be interesting to see if it effected ball speed at all?

Could be. . .

They seemed to take off the same, just the flight was kind of sluggish and short?

[ChrisWev]

Yeah I imagine the temp effects the ball at impact, which can reduce ball speed and along with a crap range ball effecting ball speed at impact. The Humidity or dampness will probably effect it more in flight, with water being more dense than air etc.

[Pretzel]

So, I hit balls at the driving range today, and noticed that the balls were carrying really short. The balls themselves were soaking wet. The temperature was a little less than 58F and the air was cold and damp, but the balls were going about 25 yards less than I expected on my drives.

The variation in air temperature which is about:

226 -------105

224 ------- 95

222 ------- 85

220 ------- 75

216 ------- 65

214 ------- 55

205 ------- 45

196 ------- 35

For the temperature in question is is only 221-215 or 6 yards.

I took out my Disto 810, and measured the bounce height off a smooth and clean spot in the pavement. 10 of the range balls bounced from 34 to 38 inches on 3 trials each. Yes, I looked like a total nerd on the range. In any case, I took the ProV1x from my bag and did the same thing and all three balls bounced to 40 inches within an 1 inch or so. The COR is sqrt(h/H) where h is the bounce back height and H is the drop height. I calculated the range balls to have a COR of 0.775 while my proV1 were right about 0.8165 which accounts for about 5.4% distance variation. On my drives this translates to about 12-13 yards.

So, temperature and COR loss account for only 18-19 yards of lost distance not 25 yards or so.

Could the damp conditions could account for the remaining yards lost? Or maybe it was the fact that the balls were soaking wet as if they sat in a vat of water overnight which also influenced flight? Or both?

Not sure what the remaining 6-7 yards could be from?

It could be from launch characteristics. I imagine a worn range ball with its hard cover would likely launch at a lower angle and with less spin than a ProV1, which would translate into less carry distance. The water on the golf ball would also contribute to less spin and less carry, because it would make the ball more inclined to "hydroplane" rather than "roll" up the face. I put those two terms in quotes there just because that's probably not what actually happens when you delve into the actual interaction, there's really not enough time for the ball to roll up the face of a club during impact, but it's a couple of terms that might get the feel across.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

So, I hit balls at the driving range today, and noticed that the balls were carrying really short. The balls themselves were soaking wet. The temperature was a little less than 58F and the air was cold and damp, but the balls were going about 25 yards less than I expected on my drives.

The variation in air temperature which is about:

226 -------105

224 ------- 95

222 ------- 85

220 ------- 75

216 ------- 65

214 ------- 55

205 ------- 45

196 ------- 35

For the temperature in question is is only 221-215 or 6 yards.

I took out my Disto 810, and measured the bounce height off a smooth and clean spot in the pavement. 10 of the range balls bounced from 34 to 38 inches on 3 trials each. Yes, I looked like a total nerd on the range. In any case, I took the ProV1x from my bag and did the same thing and all three balls bounced to 40 inches within an 1 inch or so. The COR is sqrt(h/H) where h is the bounce back height and H is the drop height. I calculated the range balls to have a COR of 0.775 while my proV1 were right about 0.8165 which accounts for about 5.4% distance variation. On my drives this translates to about 12-13 yards.

So, temperature and COR loss account for only 18-19 yards of lost distance not 25 yards or so.

Could the damp conditions could account for the remaining yards lost? Or maybe it was the fact that the balls were soaking wet as if they sat in a vat of water overnight which also influenced flight? Or both?

Not sure what the remaining 6-7 yards could be from?

It could be from launch characteristics. I imagine a worn range ball with its hard cover would likely launch at a lower angle and with less spin than a ProV1, which would translate into less carry distance. The water on the golf ball would also contribute to less spin and less carry, because it would make the ball more inclined to "hydroplane" rather than "roll" up the face. I put those two terms in quotes there just because that's probably not what actually happens when you delve into the actual interaction, there's really not enough time for the ball to roll up the face of a club during impact, but it's a couple of terms that might get the feel across.

This seems very likely.

[Dave2512]

I don't notice temp changes on the ball until it gets very hot or very cold and most of it is how it feel when struck. How far is a moving target anyway. If I hit 100 balls on FlightScope no two shots are alike.

[Lihu]

I don't notice temp changes on the ball until it gets very hot or very cold and most of it is how it feel when struck. How far is a moving target anyway. If I hit 100 balls on FlightScope no two shots are alike.

I would imagine that at your altitude temperature changes do not affect the density as much as at sea level?

Also, 5-7 yards is pretty hard to tell from shot to shot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Density_of_air

http://www.denysschen.com/catalogue/density.aspx

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave2512

I don't notice temp changes on the ball until it gets very hot or very cold and most of it is how it feel when struck. How far is a moving target anyway. If I hit 100 balls on FlightScope no two shots are alike.

I would imagine that at your altitude temperature changes do not affect the density as much as at sea level?

Also, 5-7 yards is pretty hard to tell from shot to shot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Density_of_air

http://www.denysschen.com/catalogue/density.aspx