the smaller ball Vs the modern large ball

[patricks148]

I'd tried this experiment before and never got more than a few shots with it.

Over the last few weeks Balrick has found a couple of Old Dunlop 65 that were in pretty good condition, so decided to try them out again a prov1.

Went for a round at Fortose last night, and used the old smaller ball and though it was pretty windy the old ball was far less effected by the wind, felt lovely off the putter ( and could be the answer to DelC problems) was easy to hole as the hole was massive compared.

I only started playing back in 2006 so have never really had that much of an opportunity to use old equipment, and always fancied a go with hickory clubs.

FR isn't along course and i didn't use the driver just my trusty two iron off the tee.

So the question is why did we change to the larger ball?

 

[Foxholer]

...
So the question is why did we change to the larger ball?

To standardise!

And the 'big ball' was chosen because the vast majority of golfers (aka US ones) used the big ball!

As for DelC's problems (apart from inability to post ) I know (slightly) an ex winner of the Brabazon Trophy (and ex R&A Captain) who still got the yips with the 'small ball'!

 

[Fish]

Has Delc got Patrick's password and crashed his account

:smirk:

 

[Foxholer]

Has Delc got Patrick's password and crashed his account

:smirk:

Del using a 2-iron? Absolutely not!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I remember finding my first large ball. On Deaconsbank muni in Glasgow - 16th hole - short downhill par 3 - in a clump of trees to the right of green) - about 1973 I'm guessing. It was a Titleist (or maybe a Top Flite?). And it looked very exotic. I kept it for ages not playing it.

 

[williamalex1]

I remember finding my first large ball. On Deaconsbank muni in Glasgow - 16th hole - short downhill par 3 - in a clump of trees to the right of green) - about 1973 I'm guessing. It was a Titleist (or maybe a Top Flite?). And it looked very exotic. I kept it for ages not playing it.

I thought it was round about 1982 they changed to the big ball

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I was a young assistant pro when the change came in...late 1960's.?
If I remember correctly you could play with either size ball for two years.
I was brought up on links courses. It cost about two shots a round initially.

My first competition experience using a big ball was on a windy day at Kilspindie.
I recall following a ball around the green waiting for it to stop so I could hit a putt.

Playing the 1.68 ball there was a big difference in yardage hitting into the wind, but I found it easier to pitch and put with.
Bounce games against good amateurs became harder as they would always use the small ball.

After a couple of years things settled down.
No real advantage or disadvantage IMO

 

[williamalex1]

I was a young assistant pro when the change came in...late 1960's.?
If I remember correctly you could play with either size ball for two years.
I was brought up on links courses. It cost about two shots a round initially.

My first competition experience using a big ball was on a windy day at Kilspindie.
I recall following a ball around the green waiting for it to stop so I could hit a putt.

Playing the 1.68 ball there was a big difference in yardage hitting into the wind, but I found it easier to pitch and put with.
Bounce games against good amateurs became harder as they would always use the small ball.

After a couple of years things settled down.
No real advantage or disadvantage IMO

I only started playing golf in the early 80s and the 1.62 was still being used in comps till the late 80s. I remember thinking how big it was, and hated putting with it

 

[Foxholer]

My first competition experience using a big ball was on a windy day at Kilspindie.
I recall following a ball around the green waiting for it to stop so I could hit a putt.

Always a serious challenge in a 'breeze'!

Though I'm surprised you didn't call it 'Luffness'! :rofl:

 

[duncan mackie]

It's so so much easier to putt with the larger ball...try a 1.70 or 1.72 if you don't believe me (try a tennis ball!)

Moves less in response to small discrepancies in the surface too.

Higher spin rates = more control

Then again a 1.62 could cheat the wind far better 😀

There's a serious mindset element at play for most on any subjective comparisons. I've still got a fair few and remember hanging onto them until the last minute but once you got over it the 1.68 wasn't the ogre it appeared.

 

[Crow]

I took my 1950s Gradidge set out this evening and played a Penfold Ace for 9 holes, the only thing I can say with any authority is that it must have lain at the bottom of a ditch for several years as it didn't travel any distance.

I've a few other 1.62" balls to use but won't be playing this one again!

 

[jim8flog]

I started to play about 1977/8. I had heard they were going to standardised the ball so I only ever bought the bigger ball. The only time I played with the smaller ball was when I found one. The bigger ball was a lot easier to get airborne.

Some manufacturers have released larger balls eg Toplflite Magna, Maxfli Noodle+. My mate always played the latter and was very annoyed when they were discontinued. He was a slow swinger of the club and found them even easier to get airborne.

 

[jim8flog]

I took my 1950s Gradidge set out this evening and played a Penfold Ace for 9 holes, the only thing I can say with any authority is that it must have lain at the bottom of a ditch for several years as it didn't travel any distance.

I've a few other 1.62" balls to use but won't be playing this one again!

It should be remembered that this ball and the Dunlop 65 are wound golf balls and by now it is very likely that windings have disintegrated.
The Titleist Tour balata used to have a sell by date on the box for this reason. Shelf life was reckoned to be about 3 years.

 

[duncan mackie]

It should be remembered that this ball and the Dunlop 65 are wound golf balls and by now it is very likely that windings have disintegrated.
The Titleist Tour balata used to have a sell by date on the box for this reason. Shelf life was reckoned to be about 3 years.

Indeed - but many later balls were wound too and I have a few dozen 384 pts still boxed....ive used them previously and they still 'work' but there were such performance improvements to balls in the decades since that it's impossible to tell if it's detioration or simply design that leaves the performance so poor!
You won't find early ProVs like the 392 in my bag for the same reason; and they aren't even wound.

 

[jim8flog]

Indeed - but many later balls were wound too and I have a few dozen 384 pts still boxed....ive used them previously and they still 'work' but there were such performance improvements to balls in the decades since that it's impossible to tell if it's detioration or simply design that leaves the performance so poor!
You won't find early ProVs like the 392 in my bag for the same reason; and they aren't even wound.

The 384PTS are surlyn covered and it could simply be that this cover holds the ball together a bit better than the balata balls.

I never liked the ProV1 392 from the off, the performance from ball to ball was so variable, particularly greenside spin. A couple of pros I used to play with regularly never played them for the same reason.

 

[patricks148]

It should be remembered that this ball and the Dunlop 65 are wound golf balls and by now it is very likely that windings have disintegrated.
The Titleist Tour balata used to have a sell by date on the box for this reason. Shelf life was reckoned to be about 3 years.

TBH the old Dunlop lasted better than the Prov1 around fortrose, mind you it wasn't very white to start with

 

[Orikoru]

This is a history lesson for me. Never knew balls had changed sizes!

 

[xcore]

This is a history lesson for me. Never knew balls had changed sizes!

X2! Tempted to try and find some on ebay

 

[patricks148]

X2! Tempted to try and find some on ebay

me too, like to try a new one rather than one that had maybe been lying in the undergrowth for 30 odd years