Amazon Basics Versus Callaway Supersoft: How Close Is A $14.49 Golf Ball To The Category Leader?

We put Amazon’s ultra-cheap Core Soft golf ball head-to-head with Callaway Supersoft using a robot. The results may surprise you.

When the Amazon Basics golf ball hit the market, there wasn’t much in the way of detail—at least not nearly as much as you’d get from a mainstream OEM.

Between Amazon and the USGA conforming list, we were able to confirm that the Core Soft is a two-piece ball (ionomer cover), it likely was produced at the same factory as the Kirkland and PXG offerings, and regardless of whether or not it was suitable for the “VERSATILE USE” Amazon claims, there’s no arguing that it’s dirt cheap.

At $14.49 for one dozen or just over $24 for a two-dozen bundle, the Amazon ball is one of the most affordable golf balls on the market. If saving money is the only thing that matters, Amazon is tough to beat. But for golfers interested in learning a bit more about the Amazon Basics Core Soft and how it performs, we decided to dig deeper (and do some testing).

With two-piece construction, it’s never going to be mistaken for a Pro V1 (or even a Kirkland Signature). Perhaps the most interesting detail about the Amazon ball is its compression. On our gauge, it measures 55, which puts it among the softest on the market, and just a few points firmer than the Callaway Supersoft.

Supersoft is notable for not just its (super) soft compression but also for being the best-selling two-piece ball on the market (by plenty).

Amazon Basics Core Soft: The value alternative to Supersoft?

While most DTC and house brands overtly target the Pro V1 or the Pro V1x, Amazon seems to have taken a different approach. To the best of my recollection, the Amazon Basics Core Soft is the first DTC offering to (apparently) intentionally compete with the market leader in the soft category.

It’s an interesting strategy given the inherent price constraints (they have to be cheap) but the thinking (and all of the evidence to date) suggests Amazon can make up for what must be exceedingly tight margins with high volume.

Since they launched, the Core Soft has been out of stock every bit as often as not so it seems like Amazon might be on to something.

To be sure, I’m not entirely convinced the golfer spending less than $13 for a dozen Amazon balls or less than $25 for a dozen Supersofts is making much of a performance-driven decision. Still, we felt like it made sense to see how the Amazon Basics Core Soft stacks up to the market leader in the category.

Let’s dig into the data.

About the test

For this test, we hit the Amazon Basics Core Soft side by side with the Callaway Supersoft.

Data was collected with Trackman (drivers and irons) and Foresight GCQuad (wedges).

While we conduct our larger ball tests at three speeds, for this smaller test, the driver’s speed was set to 100 mph. Irons were tested at 80 mph while the wedge test was designed to replicate a greenside shot of approximately 25 yards.

As I’ve noted previously, we’ll often use these smaller ball tests as an opportunity to experiment with different robot settings and different clubs. This time around, we used an iron model (Srixon ZX5) we’ve previously used at lower speeds only. Our greenside distance was also a bit shorter.

Driver data

jQuery(document).ready(function() {
var mgsTablepressRowClicked = false;
jQuery(document).on(‘click’, ‘#tablepress-521 tr td’, function(e) {
if (e.target.nodeName == “A”) { //if link is clicked in column, then allow it to work
//console.log(‘tablepress row td clicked a href in td’);
return;
}
var mgsTablepressRowLink = jQuery(this).closest(‘tr’).find(‘td.column-1 a’);
if (mgsTablepressRowLink.length) {
//console.log(‘tablepress row td clicked – go to column a href’);
window.document.location = jQuery(mgsTablepressRowLink).attr(“href”);
}
});
});

Observations:

• The first thing you’ll notice is there’s very little difference between the two balls off the driver.
• Differences in speed, launch angle, spin and height are minimal and not statistically significant.
• Under the conditions tested, driver spin for both balls is excessively low and could border on unplayable for some golfers.
• Supersoft has the advantage in carry and total yards but a good bit of that can be traced to a single shot with the Amazon Basics Core Soft that flew appreciably shorter. There’s no evidence that wind was a factor, nor is there anything in the data to suggest a misread.
  • The most likely culprit is an arodynamic deficiency caused by dimple disruption (uneven paint or similar manufacturing defect.

Driver dispersion and consistency

Observations:

The cuckoo Amazon ball observed is evident in the dispersion pattern which shows greater variation in the front-to-back distance. Beyond that, the actual dispersion areas (square yards) are nearly identical.

The shot patterns reinforce what we see in the launch monitor data. That is to say that there isn’t much in the way of difference to be found in performance off the driver.

7-iron data

jQuery(document).ready(function() {
var mgsTablepressRowClicked = false;
jQuery(document).on(‘click’, ‘#tablepress-523 tr td’, function(e) {
if (e.target.nodeName == “A”) { //if link is clicked in column, then allow it to work
//console.log(‘tablepress row td clicked a href in td’);
return;
}
var mgsTablepressRowLink = jQuery(this).closest(‘tr’).find(‘td.column-1 a’);
if (mgsTablepressRowLink.length) {
//console.log(‘tablepress row td clicked – go to column a href’);
window.document.location = jQuery(mgsTablepressRowLink).attr(“href”);
}
});
});

Observations:

• As with the driver data, the performance difference between the two balls is minimal to the point of being indistinguishable.
• Speed, launch, spin … across the board, there are no statistically significant differences in the data.

The broad strokes takeaway here is that the Supersoft and Amazon Basics Core Soft are about as similar as any two balls you’re likely to find.

As quick aside … yeah, the Srixon is a fast iron. While clubhead speed was inline with our larger ball test, switching from a player’s iron to a more speed-centric design produced significantly faster ball speeds and more distance. The upside is that speed helps identify differences (not that we found many here) but we’ll probably stick with player’s irons moving forward.

7-iron dispersion and consistency

Observations:

• Again, we find slight differences in the dispersion patterns (Callaway is wider, Amazon is shallower).
• The scale of the charts exaggerates the differences but the patterns themselves are roughly the same size.

Wedge data

jQuery(document).ready(function() {
var mgsTablepressRowClicked = false;
jQuery(document).on(‘click’, ‘#tablepress-522 tr td’, function(e) {
if (e.target.nodeName == “A”) { //if link is clicked in column, then allow it to work
//console.log(‘tablepress row td clicked a href in td’);
return;
}
var mgsTablepressRowLink = jQuery(this).closest(‘tr’).find(‘td.column-1 a’);
if (mgsTablepressRowLink.length) {
//console.log(‘tablepress row td clicked – go to column a href’);
window.document.location = jQuery(mgsTablepressRowLink).attr(“href”);
}
});
});

Observations:

• With wedges, we again find minimal difference between balls.
• The only meaningful difference is found in the spin rate where the Amazon ball spun approximately 200 rpm more.

Wedge dispersion and consistency

Observations:

The scale of the chart inflates differences between balls.

• Even with allowances for small numbers, the Callaway Supersoft was more consistent from front to back and similar from left to right.

Which one’s better?

Given the cuckoo ball observed with the Amazon Basics sample off the driver, the bigger (although not by nearly as much as the scale of the chart suggests) dispersion pattern with wedges and the slight distance advantage across the board, I’m inclined to say the Callaway Supersoft performed slightly better.

That said, factoring in performance off driver, 7-iron and wedge, it’s entirely reasonable and fair to suggest there is very little, other than price, separating these two balls.

If cost is a key factor in your buying decision, I’m not sure there’s enough between them to justify a $10 or more difference in price. Frankly, I’m pretty sure there isn’t.

The bottom line

Neither the Callaway Supersoft nor the Amazon Basics Core Soft is designed for tour-level (or arguably mid-range) performance. The point of Supersoft, and apparently the Amazon ball as well, is to deliver exceptionally soft feel. That’s it. That’s the entirety of the story. Whatever you get beyond that is little more than happenstance.

The golf ball industry’s dirty little secret is that, as much as golfers love soft balls, they’re exceedingly difficult to make (or at least make well). Quality/consistency will invariably fall short of firmer balls.

The point is that when you’re playing in the absolute softest part of the market, nobody is making a top-quality product which makes a strong case that, if soft feel is what you’re looking for, there’s no reason to spend a penny more than you have to.

The post Amazon Basics Versus Callaway Supersoft: How Close Is A $14.49 Golf Ball To The Category Leader? appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

Source link