Showing posts with label chrome soft. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chrome soft. Show all posts

Monday, 4 September 2017

Chrome Soft vs TP5 vs TP5X

Introduction
As previously stated I love the Callaway Chrome Soft and it is my normal ball. My previous testing has suggested (others have concluded similarly) that a premium ball is a premium ball and you should make your selection based on other factors such as cost, feel, colour etc.

The TP5/TP5X balls appear a little different. TM claim they launch higher with lower spin on full shots whilst maintaining the high spin character of a premium ball on shorter shots. If true this is really interesting.

For my skill level I get too much spin with a premium ball which increases the amount of curvature I get. If I could get a ball which exhibits consistently (wet vs dry etc) lower spin with longer shots it might help. An additional benefit of consistently lower spin would be better performance in the wind.

Hypothesis
TM claim the TP5 should launch higher with lower spin on longer shots. The TP5X should launch higher still with even lower spin and increased ball speed. Performance on short shots should be unaffected.

I have recently switched to CF16 irons in an attempt to reduce spin, is it possible the TP5/X balls will exhibit too little spin when paired with these irons?

Method
Within the limitations of my setup I tested by capturing 5 solid shots (not blatant mishits) with each ball and multiple clubs. Shots were struck from a soft range mat. Using this mat I have noticed shots launch higher and travel less distance compared to a firmer mat or turf. Spin rates are also higher and less variable than those encountered playing 'real' golf.

The balls were:
Callaway Chrome Soft
Taylormade TP5
Taylormade TP5X

The clubs were:
60° wedge (goal was a 50 yard pitch)
9 Iron (40°)
7 Iron (31°)
5 Iron (24°)
3 Iron (19°)
Driver (9.5°)

Results and Analysis

Subjective:
Nothing feels as soft as a Chrome Soft but the TP5 is noticeably softer than the X.
The TP5/X balls are also more clicky sounding.
During testing I noticed the TP5 ball initially seemed to get a little 'hairy'. This wore off after a few more shots and all of the balls appear durable. After completing my testing the Chrome Soft is in the best condition although the difference is minor.

Data:

60 Degree Wedge (Target 50 Yards):
Launch Angle was way higher with the TP5/X. I was hitting into a net and the launch angle was so steep I had to move my mat closer to avoid hitting the top!
 Spin rate was lower with the TP5/X, it averaged approx 1000rpm lower.


 9 Iron:
Launch Angle for the TP5 was similar to the chrome soft, but the TP5X launched significantly higher.
 Spin rates comparable.
 Average carry distance slightly longer for TP5/X.

7 Iron:
 Launch angle higher for TP5, higher still for TP5X.
 Spin rate comparable between Chrome Soft and TP5. TP5X substantially lower spinning.
 TP5 peak height > Chrome Soft. TP5X higher still.
 Carry distances similar.

 5 Iron:
 TP5X launches slightly higher.
 TP5 spin rate slightly lower than Chrome Soft. TP5X substantially lower.

 TP5X carry distance higher than Chrome Soft/TP5 by approx 5 yards.

3 Iron:
TP5X ball speed higher.
 TP5X launch angle > TP5.
 TP5/X spin rate < Chrome Soft.

 TP5/X carry distances longer than Chrome Soft.

Driver:
Ball speed highest with TP5X. Better than Chrome Soft by 3mph and TP5 by 2mph.
 Launch Angle highest with Chrome Soft (overridden by strike?)
 Spin rates comparable, controlled by strike.

 TP5X longer than Chrome Soft by 11 yards on average.



Raw data can be found here.


Do the TP5/X launch higher?
Yes, although most surprisingly with a 60deg wedge. In general the X launches higher than the 5.

Do the TP5/X spin less?
Yes, especially in the middle irons? On the 50 yard shots the TP5/X balls had a significantly lower spin rate

Is ball speed higher with the TP5/X
In the case of the X yes, but not by much.


Conclusion
The TP5/X are interesting balls; they actually appear to be doing something differently. They launch higher, spin less and travel slightly further. It is great to see TM taking a different direction with their ball design and I am keen to test these on course in the near future.


Update 07/09/17:
I have now managed to test on course and the results were interesting (and mostly subjective).

  • Off the tee I hit both balls, the TP5X went further on 4 occasions and the Chrome Soft went further on 3. 
  • When the TP5X was longest it tended to be by a greater amount than when the Chrome Soft was longest.
  • On approach shots the TP5X went further on 3 occasions.
  • Both balls appeared to stop equally well (distance between pitch mark and resting place).
  • The TP5X launched and flew visibly higher with iron shots. 
  • The TP5X appeared to be affected less by the wind.
  • The TP5X felt much harder than the Chrome Soft.

Strike is king. I believe the TP5X does behave differently to other premium balls, but fractional mishits vs flushed shots still count more than relatively minor differences between the balls.





Thursday, 4 May 2017

Chrome Soft vs Chrome Soft X

Introduction
I love the Callaway Chrome Soft, without doubt my favourite ball. The introduction of an X version meant I had to test it.

Hypothesis
This is an interesting one. My previous testing with premium balls and indeed other comparisons between these models suggests there will be no difference. However, Callaway claim the X version should fly lower and spin slightly more whilst feeling slightly firmer.

A excellent review here.
GolfWRX review here.

Method
Within the limitations of my indoor setup I tested by capturing 5 solid shots (not blatant mishits) with both balls and multiple clubs. Shots were struck from a soft range mat. Using this mat I have noticed shots launch higher and travel less distance compared to a firmer mat or turf. Spin rates are also significantly higher and less variable than those encountered playing 'real' golf.

The balls were:
Callaway Chrome Soft
Callaway Chrome Soft X

The clubs were:
LW (60°) (goal was a 36 yard pitch)
SW (52°) (goal was a 90 yard pitch)
6 Iron (29°)
3 Iron (21°)
3 Hybrid (21°)
2 Hybrid (18°)

Results and Analysis

Subjective:
The X ball is superb/weird. It felt very similar-slightly firmer to me but made a noticeable click compared to the duller thud of the normal chrome soft. I really like the click and soft feel of the X, but I also really like the thud and soft feel of the normal ball!

Data:
These are screenshots, the first club is the normal chrome soft, the second is the X.


As usual, raw data can be found here.

Does the X fly lower?
Not the way I hit it!

Does it spin more?
Technically I think it might a little; with the exception of the 36 yard pitch every single club did spin slightly more. However, I dont think a few hundred rpm of additional spin is going to affect my scores!

Conclusion
I think this was as expected. There may be differences between these balls if you are a tour player but as an amateur a premium ball is a premium ball. I would and will happily play either chrome soft model.

Next Steps
Once I get a setup capable of withstanding 3W/Driver shots repeat the testing.

Tuesday, 31 January 2017

Wet Ball Testing

Update 06/02/17:
I would love somebody to peer review/verify my results...

Having had my Skytrak for a few weeks I have noticed a strange phenomenon when practising at the driving range which I also observed last year on Trackman:
During my Trackman practise I would sometimes observe significant distance differences from one session to another. At the time I thought it might be local weather conditions; a strong headwind reducing distances some days and not others. During each session the wind didnt feel overly strong but distances varied significantly.
My first range session with my skytrak produced a similar distance deviation; I was hitting short-middle irons approx 1-2 clubs longer than normal. When I started looking at the data it became clear the spin rate was significantly lower than expected, not higher as I have typically found with range balls. At the time my teaching pro said it was probably because the balls were wet but I didnt appreciate the difference it made so I set about testing this.

Please see my previous post for the dry ball data here.

Research
This seems to be a poorly studied area with relatively little information available:
http://blog.tourspecgolf.com/wet-versus-dry-golf/
http://www.andrewricegolf.com/andrew-rice-golf/2013/02/wedges-and-water
http://blog.trackmangolf.com/the-difference-in-range-ball-distances/


Hypothesis (largely taken from dry ball testing)
Spin rate will be reduced. Spin rate will be higher with premium balls and lofted clubs.
Distance is largely the same across different ball types but it will be higher when the ball is wet due to reduced spin.

Method

Within the limitations of my indoor setup I tested by capturing 5 solid shots (not blatant mishits) with 4 balls and three clubs. Shots were struck from a soft range mat. Using this mat I have noticed shots launch higher and travel less distance compared to a firmer mat or turf. I dropped each ball into a pot of water prior to hitting.

The 4 balls were:
Titleist Pro V1x
Callaway Chrome Soft
Titleist DT Trusoft
Callaway Supersoft

The clubs were:
PW (46.5°)
7 Iron (33°)
5 Iron (26°)


Results and Analysis

The results shocked me:

A 74% reduction in spin rate between premium and non-premium ball with a PW.

A 21% increase in carry distance (31 yards) between premium and non-premium ball with a 7 iron.




I was expecting to see a difference, but not of this magnitude. That is almost 3 clubs of difference with a 7 iron, not to mention the additional rollout you would get on landing (42 yards in my Skytrak data).

This analysis took several attempts to capture because the quantity of water needed to decimate spin was miniscule. When I first ran the testing I tried to do 1 ball at a time, running dry then wet testing with each ball. I started with 2 premium balls so all was fine and results were inline with expectation. However, I couldn't get dry ball results from the two non-premium balls because there was water on my hitting area (the castoff water) which led to a film of water on the club and low spin flyers. I continued hitting for some time (30-40 shots) but it was never dry enough to replicate proper dry results.

Conclusion

  • If you hit the ball reasonably well and play in anything other than a desert use a premium ball. If you dont you risk hitting flyers frequently (even from the fairway).
  • A tiny amount of water interacting with a non-premium ball can decimate spin.
  • A premium ball is largely immune to this phenomenon; presumably because of the softer cover material which allows the grooves to bite.
  • The difference seems greatest with a medium iron.


Supporting Data












Friday, 27 January 2017

Dry Ball Testing

This is my third attempt at documenting this analysis because it threw up issues each time I tested; something which should have been easy to test!

Hypothesis
  • Distance is largely the same across different ball types.
  • Spin rate will be higher with premium balls and lofted clubs.
Method

Within the limitations of my indoor setup I tested by capturing 5 solid shots (not blatant mishits) with 4 balls and three clubs. Shots were struck from a soft range mat. Using this mat I have noticed shots launch higher and travel less distance compared to a firmer mat or turf.
The 4 balls were:

  1. Titleist Pro V1x
  2. Callaway Chrome Soft 
  3. Titleist DT Trusoft
  4. Callaway Supersoft
The clubs were:

  1. PW (46.5°)
  2. 7 Iron (33°)
  3. 5 Iron (26°)


Results and Analysis
Distance was similar especially when ball speed was taken into account:
Spin Rates were roughly inline with expectation, although the DT Trusoft was surprisingly high spinning with a PW.

Looking at the data the Prov1x was slightly lower spinning and slightly shorter than the other balls. At the time of testing I thought this was because it was the first ball in each set. However, as I am now discovering testing indoors (and not losing golf balls) is extremely punishing on golf balls. A day after this data was collected the Prov1x started showing very low ball speeds and shortly after this it sounded strange. Upon inspection I noticed the ball had fractured!

The wet ball testing is where things get interesting...


Supporting data: