MyGolfSpy Ball Lab is where we quantify the quality and consistency of the golf balls on the market to help you find the best ball for your money.
About the TaylorMade Tour Response
The TaylorMade Tour Response is the replacement for the Project( a ). That was a ball that got a lot of love among connoisseurs of soft golf balls and rightfully so, I believe. The Project( a ), and now the Tour Response, are among the softest urethane-covered projectiles on the market. And while TaylorMade is not immune to the liabilities of soft( soft really is slow ), greenside rotate was a bit better than similar balls. We’d expect that to be carried forward with the Tour Response, due in no small-minded persona to the noticeably thin cover.
TaylorMade Tour Response — Compression
On our gauges, the TaylorMade Tour Response quantifies 71 compressing points on average. That equals the softest projectiles in our database–a list that includes the Bridgestone Tour B RXS and Vice Pro Soft. For reference, we’re talking about a handful of degrees softer than the Callaway Chrome Soft.
TaylorMade Tour Response — Diameter and Weight
Starting with the very best: Not a single ball in our TaylorMade Tour Response test failed to achieve our better standards of roundness.
Moving on to the bad: Three percent of our test came up shy of the USGA’s minimum diameter in our projectile way test. This isn’t exclusively unexpected as TaylorMade perpetually flirts with the line and occasionally trips over it. As you’ll realise with our ball-by-ball measurements, it’s rare to find a TaylorMade ball that isn’t pushing boundaries.
It’s perhaps notable that all three of the undersized projectiles came from the same sleeve in Box 3.
Sorry, your browser doesn’t support this embedded media
TaylorMade Tour Response — Inspection
Centeredness and Concentricity
While we did note a number of minor issues with concentricity in the mantle and cover layers, we didn’t find anything significant enough to raise any serious performance concerns.
It’s hard to know exactly what to make of the core consistency. While we did note relatively small chunks of non-standard material in a couple of cores, the more noticeable issue was the change in core colour. Our sample included both lighting blue-blooded( perhaps teal) as well as navy blue( purplish cores ). A bonus sleeve which we cut for the videos more or less matched the navy cores, although with significantly more regrind.
As we’ve said before, coloring variances are not necessarily a matter of concern as there can be variation( sometimes significant variation) between batches. We are dependent upon our gauges to tell us when change equals inconsistency.
No substantial handle defects were noted.
In this section, we detail the consistency of the TaylorMade Tour Response. Our consistency metrics supply a measure of how similar the balls in our sample were to one another relative to all of the models we’ve tested to date.
The side-by-side maps for the TaylorMade Tour Response tell a somewhat complicated story.
In general, the weight consistency for the sample fell within the high aim of our Fair range which is to say it was a bit below average. As you can see from the chart, Box 1 had a reasonably substantial outlier while Box 3 was appreciably lighter in general.
Regarding diameter consistency, TaylorMade Tour Response falls within the high-pitched extremity of the average range. Container 3, which was a bit smaller overall, contained the three balls which failed the minimum diameter test.
Overall compressing consistency falls within the Average range. While compressing consistency was average, the compression delta( the distinctions between the three points evaluated on each ball) falls inside the Good range. Box 2 was generally more consistent but neither of the other cartons was appreciably firmer or softer( on average ).
True Price is how we quantify a better quality of a golf projectile. It’s a projection of what you’d have to spend to ensure you get 12 good balls.
The True Price will always be equal to or greater than the retail price. The greater the distinctions between the retail price and the True Price, the more you should be concerned about the quality of the ball.
TaylorMade Tour Response — Summary
To learn more about our exam process, how we characterize “bad” balls and our True Price metric, check out our About MyGolfSpy Ball Lab page.
Consistency is as good or better than most balls at the soft demise of the urethane category.
Three balls did not meet USGA minimum size requirements. A variety of core compositions “couldve been” a matter of concern over a larger sample.
TaylorMade Response — Final Grade
The TaylorMade Tour Response gets an overall point of 77.
The score is slightly above the average for the market as a whole and among the best of any “soft” urethane projectiles. While three balls failed to meet USGA standards( inconsistency is never good ), a slightly undersized ball will typically offer a small distance benefit so, in that respect, even the “bad” isn’t all bad.
The variation in core colouring may be cause for concern over a larger sample. However, the data we have suggests that if you’re looking for a soft( sub-7 5 compressing) urethane ball, the Tour Response is likely the one to beat.
The “True Price” of the TaylorMade Tour Response is $38.17. That’s an increase of nine percent over retail.
TaylorMade Tour Response
PGA Tour Superstore
Read more: feedproxy.google.com