golfrewind.com

Find the right golf ball for you | Equipment | Golf.com

I didn't have the magazine, so I looked forward to seeing the article myself. I maybe shouldn't have. Some of the "results" are just silly. Why are they recommending the ProV1/V1x to so many golfers? The cover hardness testing I think it silly, too. I don't think that it accurately measures the hardness felt by the golfer -- just how much the cover displaces under a given load.

Oh well, at least it's online now.

lol.........they did recommend PROV1 to all golfers except swing speeds under 75 MPH.
I have the magazine on my desk right now. Maybe they need to just start over producing them and drop the price.
Myself with an average swing speed will try the NXT Tours as I am now to the point in my game where I can utilize more spin on approach/pitch shots but I still need to stop losing balls.

By the way Bignose I think this sets the record for your shortest post lol...............
But I do read evey word and enjoy them very much.

The smart-alec in me would say that Titleist needs to sell a bunch of balls to pay for those lawsuits they have filed against them and just lost the first stage of. But, I'm not a smart-alec. No me, no way, nuh uh.

Thanks for the kind words, too, Bob.

I was told by a Titliest insider that the out-the-door cost to produce the ProV1/x is $4.00 a dozen. I guess people are paying for the marketing and endorsement costs.

The real question, what do they charge stores? Or how much do stores make per dozen?

And, just for completeness, how much of the total chain does "production" encompass? I'd guess the raw materials, the machines to make the balls, and paying the workers at the factory. But, does that include shipping costs? Storage costs? Distribution costs? Research and design? [smart-alec mode]Corporate espionage costs to steal Callaway's or Bridgestone's designs?[/smart-alec mode] $4.00 a dozen surely doesn't cover all of that, but shouldn't be neglected. Not that I am trying to defend $45 a dozen, because that is ridiculous, but I just don't think that it is fair to boil everything down to just "$4.00 a dozen", either.

Our shop paid around $39.00 per dozen for ProV balls last year. They still outsold all the other balls. We sold them for $45.99. If I had to make a 90% accurate guess, we probably sold 1000 dozen of V1's and V1x's combined.

I don't know too much about golf balls. I have been using a low spin ball because of my propensity to slice my driver. When I read the article it led me to consider going to the "middle" category; balls which provide good distance and enough spin to maybe make a dif around the greens. I might look at one of the Nike balls; Power soft or somthing like that.

The pro v1 has dominated the market for years now,you woukld have thought one of their competitors would have knocked them of top spot by now,although i will stick to my srixon z-urs.

Dang, I don't think that test tells you anything. Howinthe**** can they recommend the Pro-V1 for everyone from scratch to a +30? Or recommend the NXT Tour (at least as an alternate) in every single category?

I only looked at Titleists, because that's what I play, so I don't know if this was true for the rest of the manufacturers.

I noticed the same thing with the ProV1 and V1X being recommended to just about every level of golfer. Total stupidity, expeciall when most high handicap golfers fight a slice, and a high spin ball will only make things worse. DO YOU THING THE GOLF MAGAZINES DID THIS BECAUSE TITLEIST SPENDS LOTS OF MONEY FOR ADD SPACE ALL YEAR, AND TITLEIST WANTED THEM TO RECOMMEND THE MOST EXPENSIVE BALL THEY MAKE ????? That's really the only reason I can think of to recommend a tour quality ball to low level golfers. MONEY.

Interesting side note...British magazine Today's Golfer did a golf ball comparison test awhile back...the magazine features standard fare, but do pretty in depth equipment tests that I put a little more faith in than the "buzz" factor marketing dominated magazines "reviews"...anyway, Titleist witheld their entire line of balls for the test...interesting to say the least, and interesting enough that Today's Golfer made a point of it...I play the Pro V1 and love it, but maybe Titleist wasn't as confident in the power of their product when the playing field is leveled...

In this months edition they test balls again,including Titleist which they recommend,but when you look at the results data,launch angle,spin etc its negligible between all the big manafacturers. When they blinfolded the testers and asked them to pick out what ball felt the softest they picked the Srixon soft feel and wilson staff px3 and tx4

So last year (or the one before, they all run together) Titleist witheld their ball, this year they allow use and it is reccomended...not calling it a conspiracy yet, they do make a great ball, but odd nonetheless...

Were did they find these testers who can hit a ball cleanly with a blindfold on?

I think David Copperfield was one of them.