Connect with us

Equipment

Wilson introduces new Duo Soft golf balls, available in matte colors

Published

on

Wilson is unveiling the industry’s lowest-compression two-piece golf ball and adding some color in the process.

“The industry’s lowest 29-compression golf balls are not only the softest, longest and straightest, but now even longer and more durable,” says Frank Simonutti, Wilson’s Global Director of Golf Ball Innovation.

IMG_3530

“With a 3 percent larger core for increased ball velocity and a softer, thinner sodium/zinc ionomer cover for optimal distance and durability, this newly formulated 2-piece golf ball provides low driver spin, exceptional yardage and unparalleled soft feel to the Distance (D) player.”

WilsonDuoSoftSPin

The Duo Soft balls, which will be available in-store and online November 17, bear a $19.99 price tag for one dozen. In terms of price, the Duo Soft slides in behind Wilson’s premium Staff FG Tour Urethane ($44.99/dozen) and Duo Urethane ($37.99/dozen).

IMG_3505

Simonutti also notes company testing shows the new Duo Soft is an industry leader in the two-piece ball market.

“The optimized dimple pattern has reduced dimple depth by 5.7 percent, resulting in higher trajectory and longer distance performance.” These enhancements give DUO Soft the (1) best feel, (2) longest distance, and (3) the lowest spin leading to straightest flight off the tee in testing against all competitive premium 2-piece balls.”

IMG_3525

Consumers will be able to pre-order the Duo Soft golf ball– in one of six matte finishes –starting October 30. The balls are available in red, green, yellow, orange, pink, and a women’s matte white.

Your Reaction?
  • 192
  • LEGIT17
  • WOW9
  • LOL5
  • IDHT5
  • FLOP5
  • OB1
  • SHANK15

22 Comments

22 Comments

  1. Vito B

    Oct 11, 2017 at 5:57 pm

    Interesting. On My Golf Spy, Frank Simonetti says that they tested a large number of different golf balls and there was no more than 4 yards difference in all of them.(except for Aeroburner Soft which was “a lot shorter”). So which is it Mr. Simonetti, are they longer or not? Or are you wearing your “marketing”(aka B.S) hat?

    • JB

      Oct 13, 2017 at 3:27 pm

      In context he you are referring to two separate comparisons.

      When he says they are longer, he is referring to the previous ball these replaced. Which, yes, can generally be viewed as marketing. It is always expected to be better than previous generations. Do you think anyone would ever sell a product if they said “It is kind of better than the previous generation.” It would be like Apple saying “This is the same exact iPhone, with no real improvement over the old generation”, or “The battery life is the exact same.” Probably wouldn’t sell many phones.

      His other comment about a 4 yard difference is a comparison across all balls, both tour and non-tour caliber balls. In other words under the USGA rules, all balls essentially get the same distance, and the only difference is feel, spin, etc. So if your buying a ball just for “distance” you are wasting time, they all go the same distance give or take a few yards. Keep in mind this comparison is not a comparison with the previous DUO.

  2. William Milne

    Oct 11, 2017 at 12:20 pm

    Must tell you guys…I am senior golfer and at one time scratch player for years. I tried the duo about a year ago and have tried all the other brands and was long time PRO V! player. For my swing speed at about 90 MPH it is great! Also, what I like is that it is the softest feel off pitches and putter of ANY ball I have ever used. Sure, it doesn’t bite as well as the premiums, but for price and feel, I have come to conclusion that it is the only ball for me and I am going to quit trying to find better ball. Tried the duo spin, but did not like it as well…not sure why.

  3. matt

    Oct 11, 2017 at 10:49 am

    So Women only get the white-balls???

    • Thomas A

      Oct 11, 2017 at 11:40 am

      Don’t be racist.

    • JB

      Oct 13, 2017 at 3:29 pm

      I heard they were going to make matt black balls too, but you know what they say about going black…..

  4. Gorden

    Oct 10, 2017 at 10:27 pm

    Like what he said about distance, all most all golf balls have reached distance limit, last year Barney Adams (original Adams golf) told us Drivers had reached distance limit within the last 6 years or so….Now we need to see how long before golf governing bodies cave in to club and ball companies and make the average tour drive 350….with 400 common for big hitters…..

  5. Volvik

    Oct 10, 2017 at 9:19 pm

    Welp, there goes my business…

    • Real Volvik

      Oct 11, 2017 at 7:10 am

      Not really, we are supplying the technology to Wilson Staff. We’re doing just fine.

      • Real Real Volvik

        Oct 12, 2017 at 8:48 am

        Just kidding, no one plays our balls anyway.

        • Rick

          Oct 13, 2017 at 9:16 am

          I play the green. I don’t see as well as always but hate wearing glasses while playing. Easy to see and no glare. It even lights up the face of my irons when sun is right which is no benefit, but cool

  6. Scott

    Oct 10, 2017 at 8:54 pm

    Why don’t they come out with blue balls…

  7. etc.

    Oct 10, 2017 at 6:54 pm

    29-compressioin?!!! They must feel like a silicone ball or a really old marshmallow !!!

  8. Shane

    Oct 10, 2017 at 6:32 pm

    Says matte but in photo at top with the box they look like regular white, thus so or not? I saw them elsewhere and the shield was blue in color, what gives?

  9. Steve I

    Oct 10, 2017 at 5:07 pm

    Balls! … White balls … Yellow balls …. Orange balls …. what’s next … Blackballs?

    • etc.

      Oct 10, 2017 at 6:55 pm

      IIRC Nike came out with a ‘black’ ball.. but it was quickly discontinued…. wonder why.

  10. Cornwall1888

    Oct 10, 2017 at 11:31 am

    Softest, longest, straightest? Too good to be true

  11. Dat

    Oct 10, 2017 at 9:40 am

    Just in time for fall/winter. I like it!

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Equipment

What GolfWRXers are saying about iron covers

Published

on

@thegolfinggreen

In our forums, our members have been discussing iron covers with WRXer ‘anythingfinite’ championing the use of iron covers when walking. As a walker, ‘anythingfinite’ says

“I hated the sound of clubs clanking together with every step. So I used neoprene iron covers and endured the ridicule for years. They never, ever slowed my play as I average 18 holes in a little over 2.5hrs playing by myself. It was never about protecting resale value, just about the noise.”

And our members have been discussing iron covers and whether they currently use them or would be tempted to use them in the future.

Here are a few posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.

  • jvincent: “Clanking irons in the bag is like the sound of metal spikes on a path. It’s old school golf.”
  • Z1ggy16: “Toss your club cleaning towel in the clubs to help stop them from clanking *as much*. You can also use your one hand to kind of hold some of them in place as you walk.”
  • Windlaker_1: “I use the neoprene covers. Not for resale value, as I normally keep them so long they aren’t worth diddley-poo at that point. Use them to maintain a nice-looking set of irons.”
  • MtlJeff: “I don’t really notice it that much when I walk, to be honest. Maybe its how I arrange my clubs….If the clanging is bothering me, you can just move the clubs slightly, and it usually mitigates it. But if you’re like, breakdancing down the fairway, tough to stop it.”
  • puttingmatt: “It’s your choice. I use iron covers, lets me not forget a club around the green, as the cover in pocket is a quick reminder that something is a miss. Also, it’s a good way to protect your clubs, and at these prices, makes you wonder why not since woods and putters are sold with covers that are intended to be used. One other note, it may keep others from assessing what’s in the bag, and keep a thief wondering if the bag is worth the effort. Hate the feeling about club theft, but clubs are targets.”

Entire Thread: “Confessions of an iron cover user”

Your Reaction?
  • 0
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Equipment

Is 8 degrees between pitching wedge and sand wedge too much? – GolfWRXers have their say

Published

on

In our forums, our members have been discussing gapping degrees and whether 8-degrees between your PW and SW is too much. WRXer ‘jonsnow’ seldom hits his GW and is considering dropping the club from the bag and wants to know, if he does so, will the current 8-degree gap between his wedges be too much. Our members have their say.

Here are a few posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.

  • ZA206: “For years I played a 47 PW and a 56 SW. I had a big hole in my scoring irons range (115-105 yards) that I tried to avoid at all costs. It cost me many strokes over the years. I felt like that gap was way too big and eventually settled on 46, 51, 55 (I also play a 60 LW) as my preferred setup. No gaps and I can hit every yardage without any issue. I’m a much better wedge player now than I ever was back then, but that’s not due to having more wedges, that’s more about technique.”
  • RainShadow: “In theory, yes. In actual real world action, depends on how many types of shots you can hit with the PW.”
  • MtlJeff: “I’ve played with 52 to 60 gaps. It depends on what type of shots you want to hit. I never chip with sand wedge and would rather hit a 3/4 shot with a 52 than a full with a 56. So it all depends on your game.”
  • bazinky: “A lot depends on how often you have shots in that yardage range. For example, I replaced my 50 and 54 with a single 52 wedge because I hardly ever had a yardage that required my 50 (I would sometimes go weeks without ever hitting it). That said, my biggest gap is 6 degrees. I think it’s doable as long as you have the discipline to be smart when you have a bad yardage. It can be tough to just aim for the fat of the green when you have a wedge in your hand.”
  • Pingistheanser: “I don’t think so. I’m more of a believer that you should pick lofts based upon the distances that you need to hit from. If those lofts allow you to hit distances that you need to hit, then they’re fine for you. I’m not a believer that you should have 4-degree gaps between your wedges because what good is a club that you never hit because you never find yourself in that distance range? For a time last year, I carried a 46-degree AW and a 56 degree as my only wedges, and they worked just fine. I’d sometimes have to make some adjustments if I found myself 90 yards off of the green because it would be too far for the 56, so I would just narrow my stance, grip down a bit and only swing the AW at about 75%.”

Entire Thread: “Is 8 degrees between PW and SW too much?”

Your Reaction?
  • 1
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Equipment

Are modern irons with stronger lofts easier/harder to hit than older irons? – GolfWRXers have their say

Published

on

In our forums, our members have been discussing modern irons with stronger lofts and whether they are easier or harder to play than older irons. WRXer ‘harpu728’ kicks off the thread saying:

“Being that higher-lofted irons within the same set are easier to hit (i.e. an 8 iron is easier to hit than a 6 iron), I’m trying to draw comparisons to modern irons with stronger lofts, and if these lofts make them harder to hit in theory.

My 10-year-old’s 7 iron is 33 degrees and carries about 150. When comparing this to some of the newer sets out there where 7-irons are slightly longer (club length) and have lofts of 30 degrees, would this mean that ‘on paper’ the modern 7-iron is ‘harder’ to hit than my 10-year old’s 7 iron? Or should I be comparing my 7-iron to the modern 8-iron, which would likely carry as far as my current 7-iron?”

And our members have been weighing in with their thoughts in our forum.

Here are a few posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.

  • CAT GOLFER: “Good question, the way I understand it, disregard the number on the bottom of the club. A stronger(lower) loft in newer irons will produce a higher ball flight than the weaker(higher) loft in older clubs. At least that is the marketing pitch. The intent is to make it easier to launch the ball higher and in the process easier to hit. Also, keep in mind modern clubs also have more forgiveness built into them. Stronger lofted, higher launching, easier to hit if you buy the whole pitch.”
  • Sean2: “I don’t pay attention to the number on the club, so much as the loft. With the stronger lofts, I have no long irons in my bag as I simply can’t hit them…maybe being 65 has something to do with it as well, lol. At one time I carried 4-iron on down, now it’s 7-iron on down. But no way I can hit a 18º-19º 4-iron, let alone a 21º 5. I have the same number of irons…they just have a different number/letter on them than they did before.”
  • Warrick: “Important to pair the right shaft with these new iron setups, more so than ever.”
  • puttingmatt: “Look at it like this, instead of missing the green with a standard lofted 7 iron, now you can miss the green with the strong lofted 8 iron. I do not think the modern lofted irons translate into better scores or better misses for golfers. The loft alone is not going to turn a 5hc into a scratch player.”
  • lil’mike: “I guess you could say it something like this. Nowadays when you use a 5 iron, you get the height of a 6 iron but the distance of a 4 iron! Lol. I do think that it can make it hard to hold greens with the irons producing lower spin or at least too low of spin like some reviewers have mentioned in some cases. The bad thing about the stronger lofts is that they are getting to the point of needing two-gap wedges now before you reach the loft spacing that a sand wedge loft of 56 degrees has. For example, the new Mavrik irons have two gap wedges. So it is a 4 iron at 18 degrees, a PW is 41, so AW is 46 and GW is 51. I think that is getting ridiculous as they are turning the stock set makeup from 3-PW to 6-double gap wedge! lol”

Entire Thread: “Are modern irons with stronger lofts easier/harder to hit than older irons?”

Your Reaction?
  • 0
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending