Connect with us

Equipment

Kirkland Signature Golf Balls are… back?!

Published

on

Until they sold out of stores, Costco’s Kirkland Signature Golf Balls had the most buzz of any golf ball maybe ever, and they had GolfWRX members going CRAZY. It’s easy to see why; the 4-piece urethane golf balls were selling for only $30 per two dozen, roughly one third of the price of comparable products on the market.

It appears that a new “Kirkland Signature Performance One” golf ball has popped up on the USGA conforming list, updated on March 1.

Screen Shot 2017-03-02 at 4.17.31 PM

Based on information presented by the USGA, there are two Kirkland Signature models on the list — “Performance One” and “Tour Performance” — manufactured by SM Global LLC based in Seoul, Korea. The original Kirkland Signature golf balls were stamped “Tour Performance,” but a new “Performance One” is now on the list. According to the USGA conforming list, the Performance One will have a 4-layer construction and 360 dimples just like the original Costco ball.

KirklandGolfBalls

So, does this mean the Kirkland Signature golf balls will be back in stores? And how much will they sell for? What exactly is different about the new balls? For now, the future is uncertain, but this could be a good sign for fans of the Costco golf balls.

See what GolfWRX members are saying about Kirkland Signature Golf Balls.

Your Reaction?
  • 438
  • LEGIT26
  • WOW15
  • LOL12
  • IDHT8
  • FLOP11
  • OB4
  • SHANK53

We share your golf passion. You can follow GolfWRX on Twitter @GolfWRX, Facebook and Instagram.

45 Comments

45 Comments

  1. rory

    Jul 12, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    COSTCO always raises they’re prices over time as product becomes more popular….but we all just keep buying so I would bet a million$$$$ prices will be higher and if not right away they will soon be $20/doz not $15/doz

  2. Gorden

    Mar 29, 2017 at 8:12 pm

    The company that made balls for Taylormade in South Korea may have been replaced by a company in Taiwan…could not find any thing on the web about this..if so that South Korea company is free to make as many balls as Costco can sell?????

  3. Frank

    Mar 10, 2017 at 6:19 pm

    I’m wearing pants and a collared shirt. What’s your point? Have fun with your Top Flite XLs!

  4. Bert

    Mar 6, 2017 at 8:41 am

    I’m confused, the new replacement ball has been tested by the USGA and is on the Conforming List but is exactly the same as the one they previously sold. Was that ball on the Conforming List and if yes, why would an exact ball need to be tested? Oh it’s just a name change, then if that’s correct why aren’t they on the shelves? Sorry I’m always a skeptic.

  5. Tony Rich

    Mar 4, 2017 at 10:07 am

    My 09 Vokey will outperform any of your new wedges.
    I will take any $10 wedge from the used bag with square grooves and skin circles around your ball…smizzlle.

  6. Fat Perez

    Mar 4, 2017 at 5:35 am

    More like the clown prince.

  7. Rocco

    Mar 3, 2017 at 9:52 pm

    Hey- you talking bout my RocketBallz?
    Still better than anything out there!

    • Frank

      Mar 10, 2017 at 6:17 pm

      Ping I-15 outperform anything else I put in my hands.

  8. Fat Perez

    Mar 3, 2017 at 6:44 pm

    Kirkland Signature………For the guy rocking the red “Make America Great Again” hat.

    • Limmet

      Mar 4, 2017 at 12:44 am

      So, for the victorious guy then…

    • Joey

      Mar 4, 2017 at 8:12 am

      @fatperez this is a golf forum. No need to shove your political views onto people. ??????

  9. chip

    Mar 3, 2017 at 2:11 pm

    They forgot to mention the 3rd ball

    zing! I know, I know…

  10. TR1PTIK

    Mar 3, 2017 at 11:54 am

    My club fitter gave me a Ksig to try. I haven’t even messed with it. I’ll eventually check it out when the season is in full swing, but I don’t get all the hype. I’ll still order 5 dozen Vice Pros or Pro +s at the beginning of every season. Not enough incentive for me to bother with Costco or the possible variability of the Ksig. Think about it. If they are in fact overruns of another product and they don’t have their own engineers and such to ensure quality and consistency – who’s to say the ball you played last month will be the same as the ball you play next month?

    • KillerPenguin

      Mar 3, 2017 at 1:25 pm

      Because it’s a urethane ball that costs $1.25 a piece. I’m a budget golfer with a bazillion handicap who plays 12 year old irons acquired second hand and am a Costco member so I’m exactly the person who will line up to buy this. At that price, and at my level of skill, I’m willing to roll the dice on consistency between balls. My consistency in squaring the club face at impact is a much bigger issue than the quality of the ball I hit.

      • TR1PTIK

        Mar 3, 2017 at 2:07 pm

        So at your skill level and consistency, why do you feel the need to hit a urethane ball? Why not just buy the Wilson Fly for $5/15?

        Just playing the devil’s advocate here. No offense. I just think the type of players that truly need that level of playability should also be thinking in terms of consistency and quality. With plenty of other players in the market and so many unknowns (currently) about the development of Ksisgs, why all the fanfare? I absolutely agree that the Titleist premium needs to die and other OEMs seem to recognize that (new Z-Stars @ $39.99/dz and similar pricing from Callaway).

      • ABLE

        Mar 4, 2017 at 9:03 am

        I’m with TR1PTIK on this one. If you’re a high handicapper (I can relate, I shoot over 100) then a four-layer urethane ball is a novelty and you really could be playing with used balls. If hitting consistently is your biggest problem, the quality differences between a Noodle, Velocity, Chrome, RocketBallz, Pro V1 and a used ball will be indecipherable. The only difference I can tell between a Velocity and a Noodle or Nike is that my wallet gets lighter when I hit a Titleist into the bush.

  11. Hifade

    Mar 3, 2017 at 11:39 am

    I’ll bet these new balls are completely different, but Costco is trying to capitalize on the original demand. The first run were balls manufactured with Taylormade cores that TM had left over and unloaded to Costco (like selling scraps). When they were gone…..they were gone. I highly doubt this new version is constructed with the same components.

    • Tom

      Mar 3, 2017 at 3:28 pm

      were in the heck did that info come from

      • OingoBoingo

        Mar 3, 2017 at 4:08 pm

        I’m thinking the same place as unicorns and faeries as it’s pure fiction and speculation.

      • Dr Troy

        Mar 3, 2017 at 9:38 pm

        Hifade is right. That info was relayed on the golf channel during a special clip on the craze for the Ksig…Its not fiction or speculation.

    • Dr Troy

      Mar 3, 2017 at 9:43 pm

      Hifade is right. That info was relayed on the golf channel during a special clip on the craze for the Ksig…Its not fiction or speculation.

  12. DC1

    Mar 3, 2017 at 10:50 am

    Maybe there will be a softer version, and a firmer version…like prov1 and x?

    • ABLE

      Mar 4, 2017 at 8:58 am

      Probably not. Costco has a tendency to market a single product that goes after the market leader, rather than having four versions. Kirkland isn’t known for its variety within the brand.

  13. Josh

    Mar 3, 2017 at 10:30 am

    Most urethane covered balls are made by big OEM’s in America by American workers. These balls are made in Korea. If you buy these balls, but complain about jobs being lost overseas, you are a HYPOCRITE.

    • setter02

      Mar 3, 2017 at 7:55 pm

      Super happy that you play clubs that were 100% manufactured in N/A, wear shoes that were made here, use gloves that were also made here, clothing, sunglasses, electronic devices, etc… I mean, I wouldn’t want to call you a hypoc…

  14. Donald Quiote

    Mar 3, 2017 at 10:28 am

    I cant wait till these are on sale in the BST for $70 a dozen.

  15. Garry Pierce

    Mar 3, 2017 at 9:43 am

    I doubt the price will change much. Think like a retailer. They have these products called advertisement loss leaders. Laymen’s term. Gets people in the door, to spend more money. Costco found out people were buying more than a couple dozen balls. Costco is one of the best at getting people to spend money.

  16. MT

    Mar 3, 2017 at 9:16 am

    People are talking about which overruns these will be not understanding where golf balls are made, how golf balls are made, and the background of the golf balls history.. This isn’t history class so I won’t get into all that business, but for those that think there is that big of a difference in a golf ball…… Welcome to never never land

    • Joey5Picks

      Mar 3, 2017 at 12:46 pm

      Excellent point.

    • Peter Pan

      Mar 3, 2017 at 1:05 pm

      Big difference. Titleist doesn’t spend millions on R&D for nothing. They make better golf balls. Choppers may not know the difference but tour professionals do. It all depends whats most important. A somewhat better ball or saving $$$.

      • Brian

        Mar 3, 2017 at 1:23 pm

        Lol…titleist doesn’t spend millions on ball R&D, they spend millions putting those balls in the hands of pros to fleece ship like you out of $50 for a dozen.

    • Frank Cruz

      Mar 3, 2017 at 1:12 pm

      Fully agree!

  17. Golfguy

    Mar 3, 2017 at 9:16 am

    Might not be the same ball as before. Depends on whether they could get their hands on the same components. I thought they were out of the Taylormade cores.

  18. chris b

    Mar 3, 2017 at 8:51 am

    Let the hype begin! Wonder which overrun this will be?

  19. Dat

    Mar 3, 2017 at 8:43 am

    If they produce these for a full season, Titleist will go out of business.

  20. Brian Connellan

    Mar 3, 2017 at 8:37 am

    My guess is that Taylor Made felt “Tour Performance” was too close to “Tour Preferred” so they had to relabel it. Hopefully the ball itself is the same

    • DING DING DING!

      Mar 3, 2017 at 1:02 pm

      I think you nailed it.

      • Ronny

        Mar 3, 2017 at 8:29 pm

        The fact we are seeing the words Kirkland and Tour on the golf ball seems like a stretch. Next up-Kirkland Tour irons.
        All so wrong on so many levels.

  21. LaBraeGolfer

    Mar 3, 2017 at 8:26 am

    I have a feeling they are going to sell the comparable ball for a lot more and then the ball that is the same price as the old one will be a two piece distance ball. I hope I am wrong, I would like to try them if I stop in while they have them.

    • baba black sheep

      Mar 3, 2017 at 9:01 am

      I’ll bet you’re right. Rather than just jacking the price up to where it should be on the Tour Performance ball they probably just had the manufacturer stamp Performance One on it so they can sell it for more by calling it a newer and better ball.

    • Scott

      Mar 3, 2017 at 9:18 am

      Maybe you did not see the chart at the bottom. Both balls appear to be 4 Piece. I am not sure what the “SC” means for the Tour Performance ball. Soft Compression maybe?

      • Lopey

        Mar 3, 2017 at 10:24 am

        SC means Solid Core.

        They aren’t going to jack up the price. They’ll make them membership only and use it to sell memberships. They do this with a lot of products. Sell them at cost and make no profit but use them as leaders to sell memberships.

        • Jim

          Mar 3, 2017 at 11:45 pm

          …So far, they seem to be pretty smart with their other offerings. They aren’t losing money on these, and they made the entry at a time when the “regular” golf market was generally depressed….Dick’s eliminating the PGA pros & shrinking the sqft in golf, Nike quit…I doubt they’re looking to jump in much beyond this and risk mission creep….just like when NIKE SWORE TO US – absolutely swore they’d “never end up like Top Flite”. “We’re just going to have these two premium balls (DD & TW) one mid-price and one soft”… keep it simple and they’ll do fine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

pga tour

Ian Poulter WITB 2018

Published

on

Equipment is accurate as of the 2018 Honda Classic (2/20/2018).

Driver: Titleist 917D2 (9.5 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei Orange CK 60TX

3 Wood: Titleist 917F2 (16.5 degrees)
Shaft: Matrix Ozik TP7HDe 7X

Hybrid: Titleist 816 H2 (21 degrees)
Shaft: Aldila Tour Green ATX85H TX

Irons: Titleist 716 T-MB (4), Titleist 718 AP2 (5-PW)
Shaft: Project X LZ 130 7.0

Wedges: Titleist Vokey SM7 (52-12F, 56-14F, 60-04L)
Shaft: Project X LZ 7.0 (52), True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400 (56, 60)

Putter: EvnRoll Tour ER
Grip: Odyssey Pistol

Putter: Rife Antigua Island Series
Grip: Odyssey Pistol

Ball: Titleist Pro V1x

Related:

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Poulter’s clubs. 

Your Reaction?
  • 3
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

Equipment

10 interesting photos from Wednesday at the Honda Classic

Published

on

From our featured image of Rory McIlroy putting in a different kind of work on the range in the pre-dawn hours of Wednesday morning, to shots of Tiger Woods’ similarly early pre-pro-am range work, to some intriguing shots Patrick Reed’s prototype Bettinardi putter, GolfWRX has plenty of fantastic photo content from PGA National.

Here are some of the best shots from Wednesday.

Tiger Woods at work prior to his crack-of-dawn pro-am tee time. Gentleman in the foreground: You do know that as the sun has not yet risen, you do not need a hat to aggressively combat its rays, right?

“My feet do not look like that at impact.”

All eyes on the Big Cat…except those focused on the live video on their cell phone screens…

Let’s take a closer look at Patrick Reed’s yardage book cover. Yep. As expected.

Do you think these two ever talk?

It looks like Captain Furyk already has some pre-Ryder Cup swag in the form of a putter cover.

If you’ve ever wondered why Rickie Fowler selected these interesting locations for his tattoos, this may be the answer: Visible when he holds his finish.

We’ve got a Pistol Pete sighting!

Patrick Reed’s droolworthy Bettinardi Dass prototype.

Fun fact: Wedges double as magnetic putter cover holders, as Jon Curran illustrates here. Healthy application of lead tape, as well, from the tour’s resident graffiti artist.

Wednesday’s Photos

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about the photos in our forums.

Your Reaction?
  • 9
  • LEGIT2
  • WOW0
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK6

Continue Reading

Accessory Reviews

Review: FlightScope Mevo

Published

on

In 100 Words

The Mevo is a useful practice tool for amateur golfers and represents a step forward from previous offerings on the market. It allows golfers to practice indoors or outdoors and provides club speed, ball speed, smash factor, launch angle, spin rate, carry distance and flight time.

It also has a video capture mode that will overlay swing videos with the swing data of a specific swing. It is limited in its capabilities and its accuracy, though, which golfers should expect at this price point. All in all, it’s well worth the $499 price tag if you understand what you’re getting.

The Full Review

The FlightScope Mevo is a launch monitor powered by 3D Doppler radar. With a retail price of $499, it is obviously aimed to reach the end consumer as opposed to PGA professionals and club fitters.

The Mevo device itself is tiny. Like, really tiny. It measures 3.5-inches wide, 2.8-inches tall and 1.2-inches deep. In terms of everyday products, it’s roughly the size of an Altoids tin. It’s very easy to find room for it in your golf bag, and the vast majority of people at the range you may be practicing at won’t even notice it’s there. Apart from the Mevo itself, in the box you get a quick start guide, a charging cable, a carrying pouch, and some metallic stickers… more on those later. It has a rechargeable internal battery that reaches a full charge in about two hours and lasts for about four hours when fully charged.

As far as software goes, the Mevo pairs with the Mevo Golf app on your iOS or Android device. The app is free to download and does not require any subscription fees (unless you want to store and view videos of your swing online as opposed to using the memory on your device). The app is very easy to use even for those who aren’t tech savvy. Make sure you’re using the most current version of the firmware for the best results, though (I did experience some glitches at first until I did so). The settings menu does have an option to manually force firmware writing, but updates should happen automatically when you start using the device.

Moving through the menus, beginning sessions, editing shots (good for adding notes on things like strike location or wind) are all very easy. Video mode did give me fits the first time I used it, though, as it was impossible to maintain my connection between my phone and the Mevo while having the phone in the right location to capture video properly. The only way I could achieve this was by setting the Mevo as far back from strike location as the device would allow. Just something to keep in mind if you find you’re having troubles with video mode.

Screenshot of video capture mode with the FlightScope Mevo

Using the Mevo

When setting up the Mevo, it needs to be placed between 4-7 feet behind the golf ball, level with the playing surface and pointed down the target line. The distance you place the Mevo behind the ball does need to be entered into the settings menu before starting your session. While we’re on that subject, before hitting balls, you do need to select between indoor, outdoor, and pitching (ball flight less than 20 yards) modes, input your altitude and select video or data mode depending on if you want to pair your data with videos of each swing or just see the data by itself. You can also edit the available clubs to be monitored, as you will have to tell the Mevo which club you’re using at any point in time to get the best results. Once you get that far, you’re pretty much off to the races.

Testing the Mevo

I tested the FlightScope Mevo with Brad Bachand at Man O’ War Golf Center in Lexington, Kentucky. Brad is a member of the PGA and has received numerous awards for golf instruction and club fitting. I wanted to put the Mevo against the best device FlightScope has to offer and, luckily, Brad does use his $15,000 FlightScope X3 daily. We had both the FlightScope Mevo and Brad’s FlightScope X3 set up simultaneously, so the numbers gathered from the two devices were generated from the exact same strikes. Brad also set up the two devices and did all of the ball striking just to maximize our chances for success.

The day of our outdoor session was roughly 22 degrees Fahrenheit. There was some wind on that day (mostly right to left), but it wasn’t a major factor. Our setup is pictured below.

Outdoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our outdoor testing are shown below. The testing was conducted with range balls, and we did use the metallic stickers. The range balls used across all the testing were all consistently the same brand. Man O’ War buys all new range balls once a year and these had been used all throughout 2017.  The 2018 batch had not yet been purchased at the time that testing was conducted.

Raw outdoor data captured with range balls including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

You’ll notice some peculiar data in the sand wedge spin category. To be honest, I don’t fully know what contributed to the X3 measuring such low values. While the Mevo’s sand wedge spin numbers seem more believable, you could visibly see that the X3 was much more accurate on carry distance. Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our outdoor session when separated out for each club. As previously mentioned, though, take sand wedge spin with a grain of salt.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (outdoor testing).

The first thing we noticed was that the Mevo displays its numbers while the golf ball is still in midair, so it was clear that it wasn’t watching the golf ball the entire time like the X3. According to the Mevo website, carry distance, height and flight time are all calculated while club speed, ball speed, launch angle and spin rate are measured. As for the accuracy of the measured parameters, the Mevo’s strength is ball speed. The accuracy of the other measured ball parameters (launch angle and spin rate) is questionable depending on certain factors (quality of strike, moisture on the clubface and ball, quality of ball, etc). I would say it ranges between “good” or “very good” and “disappointing” with most strikes being categorized as “just okay.”

As for the calculated parameters of carry distance, height and time, those vary a decent amount. Obviously, when the measurements of the three inputs become less accurate, the three outputs will become less accurate as a result. Furthermore, according to FlightScope, the Mevo’s calculations are not accounting for things like temperature, humidity, and wind. The company has also stated, though, that future updates will likely adjust for these parameters by using location services through the app.

Now, let’s talk about those metallic stickers. According to the quick start guide, the Mevo needs a sticker on every golf ball you hit, and before you hit each ball, the ball needs to be placed such that the sticker is facing the target. It goes without saying that it doesn’t sound like a whole lot of fun to spend time putting those stickers on every ball, let alone balls that will never come back to you if you’re at a public driving range. Obviously, people are going to want to avoid using the stickers if they can, so do they really matter? Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls with and without the use of the stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you use the metallic stickers and when you don’t

The FlightScope website says that the metallic stickers “are needed in order for the Mevo to accurately measure ball spin.” We observed pretty much the same as shown in the table above. The website also states they are working on alternative solutions to stickers (possibly a metallic sharpie), which I think is wise.

Another thing we thought would be worth testing is the impact of different golf balls. Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls as compared to Pro V1’s. All of this data was collected using the metallic stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you switch from range balls to Pro V1’s

As shown above, the data gets much closer virtually across the board when you use better quality golf balls. Just something else to keep in mind when using the Mevo.

Indoor testing requires 8 feet of ball flight (impact zone to hitting net), which was no problem for us. Our setup is pictured below. All of the indoor testing was conducted with Titleist Pro V1 golf balls using the metallic stickers.

Indoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our indoor session are shown below.

Raw indoor data captured with Pro V1’s including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our indoor session when separated out for each club.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (indoor testing)

On the whole, the data got much closer together between the two devices in our indoor session. I would think a lot of that can be attributed to the use of quality golf balls and to removing outdoor factors like wind and temperature (tying into my previous comment above).

As far as overall observations between all sessions, the most striking thing was that the Mevo consistently gets more accurate when you hit really good, straight shots. When you hit bad shots, or if you hit a fade or a draw, it gets less and less accurate.

The last parameter to address is club speed, which came in around 5 percent different on average between the Mevo and X3 based on all of the shots recorded. The Mevo was most accurate with the driver at 2.1 percent different from the X3 over all strikes and it was the least accurate with sand wedge by far. Obviously, smash factor accuracy will follow club speed for the most part since ball speed is quite accurate. Over every shot we observed, the percent difference on ball speed was 1.2 percent on average between the Mevo and the X3. Again, the Mevo was least accurate with sand wedges. If I remove all sand wedge shots from the data, the average percent difference changes from 1.2 percent to 0.7 percent, which is very, very respectable.

When it comes to the different clubs used, the Mevo was by far most accurate with mid irons. I confirmed this with on-course testing on a relatively flat 170-yard par-3 as well. Carry distances in that case were within 1-2 yards on most shots (mostly related to quality of strike). With the driver, the Mevo was reasonably close, but I would also describe it as generous. It almost always missed by telling me that launch angle was higher, spin rate was lower and carry distance was farther than the X3. Generally speaking, the Mevo overestimated our driver carries by about 5 percent. Lastly, the Mevo really did not like sand wedges at all. Especially considering those shots were short enough that you could visibly see how far off the Mevo was with its carry distance. Being 10 yards off on a 90 yard shot was disappointing.

Conclusion

The Mevo is a really good product if you understand what you’re getting when you buy it. Although the data isn’t good enough for a PGA professional, it’s still a useful tool that gives amateurs reasonable feedback while practicing. It’s also a fair amount more accurate than similar products in its price range, and I think it could become even better with firmware updates as Flightscope improves upon its product.

This is a much welcomed and very promising step forward in consumer launch monitors, and the Mevo is definitely worth a look if you’re in the market for one.

Your Reaction?
  • 110
  • LEGIT10
  • WOW2
  • LOL5
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP7
  • OB3
  • SHANK23

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending