Pro v1/ x. Tp5/5x I’m confused

[quine]

So,  as an aging player I’ve always played these premium balls.    Currently I’ve lost launch and spin partly due to age but also because I’ve moved into stronger lifted irons.    Is the prov1x the higher spinning ball in titleist ?   Is the tp5x in Taylormade?    I “feel” like the tp5 and prov1 are spinnier.   Thanks for clarifying !  

[Jeff58]

The common error when judging golf ball performance visually is to confuse height with spin. In other words, that the higher maximum height is created by higher spin. Generally, that’s the reverse of the actual situation.

 

When discussing the tour-level balls from Titleist and TaylorMade specifically, the standard rules don’t exactly apply, as they are able to do.

 

In the case of Titleist, there is still something of a corporate hangover from the V1/V1x crossover chaos of the 2017 models. What we have in the current models is Titleist pushing the two models as far away from each other as is technically possible given their compression. The V1x spins more, has a higher max height, a d most critically a significantly later max height trajectory. The V1 is now has a low max height given its compression, to the point of impinging on the AVX. It also has a somewhat unusual spin progression: lower on driver, higher on wedge.

 

TM also is also still in recovery mode from the changes made between the 2019 TP5X and the 2021. The pros complained that the 2019 didn’t spin enough, and they were correct. It was very much a maximum distance ball, and much loved by many who were not pros because of it. The change was mostly to the cover. Unfortunately, applying the new cover to the TP5 created something of a schizophrenic personality, and its high-spinning performance across various club types is uneven. As well, new cure technology, which Titleist has already implemented, makes the use of 5 layers unnecessary and overly expensive.

 

Overall, these continuous attempts to create individuality have not helped in the least, while aiding their smaller competitors, who can focus on making the best ball possible at a non-moving target.

[byoshio82]

Have you tried the Bridgestone RX or RXS Premium ball for slower SS and helps with increased distance and spin to help get the ball up. 

[quine]

4 hours ago, Jeff58 said:

The common error when judging golf ball performance visually is to confuse height with spin. In other words, that the higher maximum height is created by higher spin. Generally, that’s the reverse of the actual situation.

 

When discussing the tour-level balls from Titleist and TaylorMade specifically, the standard rules don’t exactly apply, as they are able to do.

 

In the case of Titleist, there is still something of a corporate hangover from the V1/V1x crossover chaos of the 2017 models. What we have in the current models is Titleist pushing the two models as far away from each other as is technically possible given their compression. The V1x spins more, has a higher max height, a d most critically a significantly later max height trajectory. The V1 is now has a low max height given its compression, to the point of impinging on the AVX. It also has a somewhat unusual spin progression: lower on driver, higher on wedge.

 

TM also is also still in recovery mode from the changes made between the 2019 TP5X and the 2021. The pros complained that the 2019 didn’t spin enough, and they were correct. It was very much a maximum distance ball, and much loved by many who were not pros because of it. The change was mostly to the cover. Unfortunately, applying the new cover to the TP5 created something of a schizophrenic personality, and its high-spinning performance across various club types is uneven. As well, new cure technology, which Titleist has already implemented, makes the use of 5 layers unnecessary and overly expensive.

 

Overall, these continuous attempts to create individuality have not helped in the least, while aiding their smaller competitors, who can focus on making the best ball possible at a non-moving target.

Great stuff!  Thank you! Doctoral level response .   And yes , I’ve tried the bridgestone rx and like it .  Don’t know why other then advertising I’m drawn to titleist and Taylormade 

[Jeff58]

48 minutes ago, quine said:

Don’t know why other then advertising I’m drawn to titleist and Taylormade 

Tirleist, TM, and Callaway have superior technology to every other ball, though the off-shore makers are catching up. Their advantage is in cover material and implementation. They can make them thinner and softer without excessive yield losses. Combined with higher compression second layers,  they can generate more spin over a wider range of impact characteristics. To that extent, they are in some ways really better.

 

Does that make them worth twice as much as a Vice Pro? Not to me.

[Avidswampthing66]

Gentleman answered above but I'll reiterate.  TP5X low spin, high launch.  Pro V1X high spin, high launch.

 

The new TP5X has much improved spin around the greens, which means more control.  I think it's their best ball to date.  Does it all well.  Its brother TP5 has more spin, lower launch and a softer feel.  Also, a great ball, though not as fast.  

[North Butte]

7 hours ago, Avidswampthing66 said:

Gentleman answered above but I'll reiterate.  TP5X low spin, high launch.  Pro V1X high spin, high launch.

 

The new TP5X has much improved spin around the greens, which means more control.  I think it's their best ball to date.  Does it all well.  Its brother TP5 has more spin, lower launch and a softer feel.  Also, a great ball, though not as fast.  

I never know what to really think about golf balls, with my weak and inconsistent game. But the one time I seriously tried TP5 (versus my long-time favorite ball, Pro V1x) it sure seemed to fly low and spin a lot. I always struggle for height on my shots and TP5 made any sort of reasonable ball flight unobtainable for me. 

 

Most differences among balls are subtle enough that what I think I see is like as not just my imagination. Nothing left to the imagination with TP5, that thing flies seriously low while at the same time spinning enough to not go as far as most balls for me. 

 

To me, just like Pro V1x has always stood out as genuinely higher flight and spin the TP5 is a stand-out at the opposite extreme. I think most urethane balls on the market right now will fly higher and all but a few will spin less than TP5. And most balls will fly lower than Pro V1x with only maybe a few spinning more. They're two archetypes, really. 

 

P.S. I assume when you say "low launch" you are speaking colloquially and mean "low flight trajectory". 

[North Butte]

8 hours ago, Jeff58 said:

Tirleist, TM, and Callaway have superior technology to every other ball, though the off-shore makers are catching up. Their advantage is in cover material and implementation. They can make them thinner and softer without excessive yield losses. Combined with higher compression second layers,  they can generate more spin over a wider range of impact characteristics. To that extent, they are in some ways really better.

 

Does that make them worth twice as much as a Vice Pro? Not to me.

I probably have just enough knowledge of materials and engineering to kid myself about understand golf ball manufacturing. But I agree with what you said.

 

I further think that cast urethane is legitimately the best current cover material from a performance perspective. The thinner, softer cover and firm second layer combination can be taken to the max with cast construction. Some makers like Callaway and Srixon can get very close nowadays.

 

To my thinking, the only reason to use TPU instead of cast thermoset urethane for covers is the cast process is harder to do well, prone to higher reject rates and therefore just more expensive. Titleist has up until now at least stood out as managing to be both as good or better quality and consistency as any maker while also using the trickiest (cast thermoset) cover process. 

 

Not that I can actually save strokes or hit better shots using a Pro V1x than a Chrome Soft or Z-Star or something TPU like that. But on an absolute performance potential basis, I think a $60/dozen Pro V1x earns its price slightly better than a $55/dozen TPU ball. All the modern top-of-the-range balls from Titleist/TM/Callaway are truly amazing performance but to get that last tiny fraction cast urethane is still the champ.

[Avidswampthing66]

1 hour ago, North Butte said:

I never know what to really think about golf balls, with my weak and inconsistent game. But the one time I seriously tried TP5 (versus my long-time favorite ball, Pro V1x) it sure seemed to fly low and spin a lot. I always struggle for height on my shots and TP5 made any sort of reasonable ball flight unobtainable for me. 

 

Most differences among balls are subtle enough that what I think I see is like as not just my imagination. Nothing left to the imagination with TP5, that thing flies seriously low while at the same time spinning enough to not go as far as most balls for me. 

 

To me, just like Pro V1x has always stood out as genuinely higher flight and spin the TP5 is a stand-out at the opposite extreme. I think most urethane balls on the market right now will fly higher and all but a few will spin less than TP5. And most balls will fly lower than Pro V1x with only maybe a few spinning more. They're two archetypes, really. 

 

P.S. I assume when you say "low launch" you are speaking colloquially and mean "low flight trajectory". 

Exactly.  Lower trajectory.