MyGolfSpy Ball Lab is where we quantify the manufacturing quality and consistency of golf balls. Ball lab does not infer durability or guarantee your performance. Today, we’re reviewing the 2024 Snell Prime 3.0.
The 2024 Snell Prime 3.0 and its sibling, the Prime 2.0 and Prime 4.0, are the result of the “phoenix rising from the ashes” after founder Dean Snell scrapped the prior generation, MTB Prime and MTB Prime X. Snell set out to fix the ills of the prior models and, hence, the genesis of the new line-up.
Snell says the Prime 3.0 features a “new core for high ball speed and low driver spin for maximum distance” as well as a new 332-dimple XV3 urethane cover to provide “a soft feel” with “ultimate short game control and durability.” This new package is available in white and yellow.
Like the others in the Prime series, the 3.0 is fitted according to 7-iron playing distance. Snell says it is “designed for a wide range of mid swing speed players with 7-iron distances of 120-170 yards.”
Bringing the new Snell Prime 3.0 to market was more than just a redesign. Prior to the first golf balls ever rolling of the production line, the Launch Technologies factory in Taiwan burned to the ground resulting in Snell having to overcome yet another challenge. The current Prime series is manufactured in China.
Who is it for?
- Designed for mid swing speed players with 7-iron distances of 120-170 yards
- Snell says “the new three-piece PRIME 3.0 features a new core for high ball speed and low driver spin for maximum distance.”
- Both Snell and the USGA report low spin with the driver/mid spin with irons.
- With an average compression of 87, the Prime 3.0 will have a firm feel off the clubface.
- The Prime 3.0 golf ball comes in at US$32.99 a dozen which is significantly less the the average premium ball at US$55.
Not for you? Try these golf balls
- Struggle with too little spin? Consider the Srixon Z-Star Diamond, Callaway Chrome Soft X or Bridgestone TOUR B XS.
- Looking for a softer feel? Look at the VICE Pro Soft, Callaway Chrome Soft, or Bridgestone TOUR B RXS.
- Don’t like a soft ball? The Titleist Pro V1x Left Dash and Maxfli Tour X won’t disappoint.
- Looking for a value? Consider the OnCore ELIXR.
Why does Ball Lab matter?
The golf ball is the only piece of equipment you use on every shot.
Most avid golfers put a premium on distance with accuracy a close second. At high swing speeds, we have seen up to a 19-yard disparity between the longest and shortest ball. An off-center core could cause your golf ball to fly 20 yards offline. Heck, even a small cover defect may be costing you strokes.
In other words, your golf ball really does make a difference.
MyGolfSpy Ball Lab was conceived to quantify the quality and consistency of golf balls. As the expression goes, it’s what’s on the inside that counts.
By shining a light on quality and consistency, we can provide golfers better insight into the hidden realities of today’s golf balls and help you understand how the construction of golf balls impacts your real-life performance.
Compression
Compression is a measurement of the force necessary to deform a golf ball. The higher the compression value, the more force is required.
Compression is closely correlated with speed with higher-compression golf balls producing higher ball speeds and more potential distance.
When there is a wide spread of compression across the sample, ball speed will be inconsistent. Since spin rates are tied to compression differences between layers, inconsistencies in compression can also lead to inconsistent spin rates.
Core consistency
Our visual inspection seeks to identify issues in layer concentricity. That includes cores that are off-center and mantle layers that are uneven (visibly thicker in some areas than others).
Concentricity issues can cause a ball to fly offline or roll offline on the green. The more severe the concentricity defect, the more offline the ball is likely to fly.
In robot testing, we’ve seen perfectly struck balls fly up to 30 yards offline at driver speeds of
100 mph.
Diameter and weight
The diameter of a golf ball can affect performance in a number of ways. Balls that are not round can fly offline and will roll offline on the green.
A smaller golf ball is more aerodynamically efficient which is why golf’s governing bodies have a minimum size requirement of 1.68 inches. A larger ball, especially one described as “Tour quality”, is not maximizing its aerodynamic potential while smaller balls are non-conforming under the rules of golf.
Generally speaking, a heavier ball will produce more distance which is why the maximum allowable weight is 1.62 ounces. Balls that are significantly lighter sacrifice performance (distance) while balls that exceed 1.62 are non-conforming under the rules of golf.
In the case of diameter and weight, when there is significant variance across the sample, balls can be expected to perform differently.
Cover defects
The cover provides the aerodynamic properties of the golf ball. Familiar metrics like launch angle and peak height are directly related to the cover. When a cover is damaged, it can disrupt the aerodynamics of the golf ball. Depending on the orientation of the defect at impact, damaged balls can fly severely offline or fly significantly higher or lower than expected.
How we test golf ball quality
The Ball Lab test process itself consists of four parts.
Compression
Effectively, we have two compression metrics.
The average of our three measurements (two seam, one pole) is considered to be the compression for each ball. This is the number we publish in our compression charts. The Snell Prime 3.0 had an average compression of 87 placing it in the firm class.
If the average compression for any given ball varies significantly from the median compression for the set, it is deemed “bad.”
The second metric looks at the consistency of compression across the three points measured on each ball.
When there is significant variation across those three points, that ball is also deemed “bad.”
Our Compression Consistency rating is based on an aggregation of the two compression metrics. The total compression consistency for the sample tested was poor with a compression variability of 17.8 points. Due to compression variances, six (6) balls were flagged as bad.
Weight
With an allowance for a small margin of error, a ball is deemed “bad” when its weight exceeds the allowable limit of 1.620 ounces.
In addition to the weight of each ball, we also track the consistency of weight across the entire sample. The weight consistency for the sample tested was poor and twenty (20) balls were flagged as bad due to being over the allowable weight limit.
Diameter
Diameter measurements are taken at four points on each golf ball (two seam, one pole, one off-pole/off-seam). Our diameter measurement represents the average of the four points measured. The 4-point diameter for the sample tested was 1.68552 inches giving it and extra large diameter classification.
When there is significant variation between points, the ball is measured again to ensure accuracy.
Using a generous standard, we compare the average of our seam measurements to our pole measurement to determine if a ball is round. A ball that is not round is deemed “bad.” Six (6) balls flagged as not round.
In addition to average size and roundness, we check each ball for adherence to the rules. The “Ball Track” procedure is performed with each ball using a custom made 1.680-inch Class X No-Go Gauge.
A ball that fails the “Ball Track” test is deemed “bad.” Zero (0) golf balls failed the ball track test.
Visual inspection
We use a generous standard in grading physical defects. The golf ball always gets the benefit of the doubt. As part of the process, balls are cut into three pieces.
Cover defects – Our approach is to look for cover defects that an average golfer is likely to notice and take issue with. To that end, minor defects such as pin marks, dimple artifacts and other small irregularities are ignored.
Balls with major defects like missing dimples, significant surface impressions, tool marks or scratched/scuffed covers are considered “bad.” Zero (0) golf balls for notable cover defects.
Core centeredness – The object of our centeredness test is not to put the ball under a microscope, count millimeters and otherwise nitpick. The goal is to identify irregularities that are likely to have meaningful performance implications.
While we note any core that is visibly off-center to the naked eye, a ball is only deemed “bad” when the core is significantly off-center. Zero (0) golf balls flagged for off-center cores.
Layer concentricity and thickness – Irregularities in the mantle and cover layers can have a quantifiable performance impact. Once again, we note visible but relatively minor issues. A ball is only deemed “bad” when there is a significant inconsistency in the thickness of the mantle or cover layers.
Typically, these are balls where one or more of the layers is significantly thicker on one side of the ball than the other. Four (4) balls flagged for layer concentricity and/or thickness issues.
Core color consistency – Small variations in color are ignored. What we’re looking for are irregularities that would indicate an inconsistent mixture or other abnormalities in the core itself.
A ball is deemed “bad” when the appearance of the core is significantly different from others in the sample. In most cases, balls with this particular defect will have already been deemed “bad” for other reasons. The core color consistency across the sample was consistent. However, there was one (1) ball in the lot that appears to be a different model with the Prime 3.0 side stamp on it.
The top three golf ball scores in MyGolfSpy Ball Lab history belong to Titleist Pro V1 (2021) TaylorMade Tour Response (2022) and Titleist Pro V1X (2021)
<div>
<img alt="Tony Covey" height="50" src="https://uploads.mygolfspy.com/uploads/2020/08/ourteam_tony1-150x150.jpg" width="50" />
</div>
<div>
<div>
Tony Covey </div>
<div>
Employee #2, Editor, Jack of All Trades </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Overall score
Performance review
The 2024 Snell Prime 3.0 golf ball was not robotically tested during the 2023 Golf Ball Test.
According to Snell, the three-piece Prime 3.0 is a total performance golf ball designed for a wide range of golfers.
Snell Golf asserts the Prime 3.0 core will provide the average swing speed golfer with high ball speed and low spin off the driver. Furthermore, “the mantle layer is designed for controlling iron spin to mid-high levels to execute every shot in the bag.” Sounds like a formidable combination for any golfer.
The post Ball Lab: 2024 Snell Prime 3.0 appeared first on MyGolfSpy.
Article Link: https://mygolfspy.com/labs/ball-lab-2024-snell-prime-3-0/