In the modern age of golf, there’s widespread debate when it comes to newer, longer equipment. For example, some believe we should “roll the golf ball back” to days it didn’t fly as far, while others accept the modern technology.
There is plenty of data — such as the USGA’s recent Distance Report — to support that new equipment does indeed fly longer and straighter. What has more of an impact, though, is a question for some. Is it the golf ball? Is it the new 460cc driver heads? Is it the shafts? Or is it golfer’s diets and workout plans that are the real culprits responsible for greater distance?
On Wednesday, 2009 Open Champion Stewart Cink took to Twitter with results from a one-off, two-ball test he conducted after finding an old wound golf ball amongst his pile of practice balls.
Remember, wound golf balls were popular prior to the 2000s and they were constructed with thread windings that wrapped around their cores. Wound balls are known now for their spin and feel, but not so much for their distance. Golf balls with solid constructions that we know today eventually replaced those antiquated wound balls.
With a Trackman handy, Cink hit the wound, Titleist Professional 90 golf ball against a new Titleist Pro V1 using his modern Ping G410 driver.
Here are his results:
Found a @Titleist Professional 90 wound ball from the late 1990’s in the heap today at practice. Did a Two ball driver Trackman comparison between it and a Pro-v1. The balls performed similarly except for one glaring difference: Ball Speed. The wound ball was a full 8MPH slower!
— Stewart Cink (@stewartcink) June 10, 2020
That 8MPH difference tranlated into a 20+ yard deficit in terms of carry. I’m sticking with the Pro-v-1!!
— Stewart Cink (@stewartcink) June 10, 2020
What do you think of Cink’s experiment? Was the distance gap more or less than you expected?
To hear more gear insights from Jonathan Wall and True Spec’s Tim Briand, subscribe and listen each week to GOLF’s Fully Equipped podcast: iTunes | SoundCloud | Spotify | Stitcher
