Nike One Tour D versus Bridgestone 330-RX

[staticline]

I usually play the Nike One Tour D. But, all the Bridgestone talk here had me wondering about their golf balls. Well, I found a new B330-RX this past Sunday, so today I played both of them for 9 holes to compare them.

Tour B330-RX Technology
The First Tour Performance Series Designed for Amateur Swing Speeds.
Tour B330-RX now Softer and Longer: Tour Distance, Precision Control, Soft Multilayer Urethane.

Features
-Optimized for AMATEUR AVERAGE < 105 MPH Swing Speeds
-SOFTER Gradational Compression Core for longer and straighter distance
-Reengineered Mantle layer for higher repulsion and workability
-SOFT Urethane Cover for pinpoint accuracy and Tour caliber control

Nike One Tour D:
Designed for players with moderate to fast swing speeds (>90mph) who look for Tour-level performance and desire longer distance off the tee. 3-piece construction, seamless urethane cover and Power Transfer Technology deliver superior length off the tee.

-------
During my 9 holes I played both balls from tee to cup. When hitting tee shots, I made sure tee height was the same for both. And, I attempted to put the same swing on both....aim at the 150 marker and put a good swing on it. I wasn't trying to hit a draw or a fade...just a good swing at the 150. On holes where I hit both the same I made a note of which ball went farther.

TEE SHOTS:
1: I hit the Nike decent, about 280, and I hit the 330 good. 330 was 7 yards farther.
2: Both hit the sweet spot. Nike , 250 against the wind, was 9 yards farther.
3: par 3. Pulled the 330 a tad. It was about 5 yards farther.
4: No comparable swings
5: Both off the heel. Nike went 220 against the wind. 330 was 8 yards farther.
6: par 3. No comparable swings
7: Smoked both drives. Nike caught some leaves but went 305 and was 3 yards farther
8: No comparable swings
9: No comparable swings

APPROACH SHOTS:
1: Downwind Nike hit and stopped. 330 missed the green.
2: No comparable approachs
3: None
4: No comparable approachs
5: 2H for both but different lies. Both went same distance but missed green.
6: None
7: down wind 7 iron, 330 was solid, hit green and went about 5 feet. Nike was a little thin but hit green and went about 10 feet
8: crosswind PW Nike was pulled a tad but on green and rolled about a foot. 330 was chunked.
9: into the wind. 9i Nike pulled a tad but on green and stopped within 6" of mark
The group in front of me left after 9. So, I ended my compare as I had 5 empty holes in front of me.....aaahhh perfect golfing. When I caught up to another group, I did start hitting both again. But, nothing happened to distinguish one from the other.

Chipping:
330 seemed to have a little more spin on chips & bump/runs.

Putting:
I've got an Odyssey Sabretooth with white hot insert. The 330 felt a little dead off the face, which I didn't like. The Tour D comes off the insert a little "crisper".

Overall:
The 330 didn't feel good to me on driver and iron shots, maybe it's a bit softer than the Tour D. But, I never hit one and thought, "that felt good". While playing, I thought that may have been due to a swing speed issue (I remember one of the Bridgestone balls being for 112+ ss's). So, I was thinking maybe I'm not compressing it. But, I checked the website when I got home and the 330-RX is for <105 ss's. So, that wasn't the issue.

I'm used to the Tour D. So, there is probably some bias due to that. I think the two balls are the same in regards to distance. On full iron shots, they seem to stop about the same. On chips the 330-RX seems to have a little more spin. My preference is the Tour D due to how it feels coming off the face. FYI, on tgw.com, the Tour D is $30/doz and the 330-RX is $43/doz.

I've got a TM Red LDP in the bag. Hopefully, I can get another 1/2 day at work and compare that to that Tour D.

My 2 cents.

 

[JB]

They are really very different golf balls. Both good balls yes, but very different. The Tour D is really designed for a harder swing speed and the Tour would be more comparable in my opinion. Dimple design is slightly similar. The TP Red would be a similar ball in my opinion to the Tour D and you most likely will see that during your testing.

Very good info.

 

[Tmex]

I love the one tour d. And the price its at right now is really good. Im curious to try the rx too. I have a box of last years Im waiting to try. Thanks for the comparison!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jshel]

Having tried both Nike balls this year and having recently tried both the RX and the RXS, here are my thoughts.

1. There is a much greater difference between the One Tour and the One Tour D than the RX and RXS.

2. One of my biggest concerns in choosing a ball is how quickly a ball will stop on the green after a full shot. Of the four balls, the One Tour and RXS are very similar in terms of putting on the breaks. The RX, however, stops much quicker than the One Tour D.

3. I haven't gone head-to-head on distance between the One Tour D and the RX, but I wouldn't be surprised if the One Tour D is a bit longer. For me, however, there just isn't enough control from the One Tour D to last in my bag.

I like the One Tour quite a bit, but I am starting to drink the Bridgestone Kool-Aid a little bit. I think if greens are soft to average, I would probably play the RX. If greens are at all hard, I think the RXS is the play for me. I won't play the One Tour D, however.

Now the question for everybody to answer is what is the price per dozen savings that makes it worth it to consider the Nikes very seriously? I'm not sure I know the answer to that for myself at this point.

 

[staticline]

They are really very different golf balls. Both good balls yes, but very different. The Tour D is really designed for a harder swing speed and the Tour would be more comparable in my opinion. Dimple design is slightly similar. The TP Red would be a similar ball in my opinion to the Tour D and you most likely will see that during your testing.

Very good info.

I played a TM ball a couple months ago, although I can't remember which one it was. I know it wasn't a Penta or a Burner. Maybe it was the TM Red. Anyway, I do remember that ball really jumped off the clubface and seemed to be a club longer on my irons. Not sure about yardage differences with the driver. I'm looking forward to comparing the TM Red LDP to the Tour D.

Now that you mention the 330-RX comparing to the Nike One Tour, I've played the One Tour and I didn't like it's feel, either.

I'm fortunate that I can get Nike balls for free or cost most of the time, and I occasionally get a dozen or two ProV's for free also. So, those are what I'm going to play. It's hard to say what ball I'd play if money wasn't an issue. I'm not going to buy a sleeve of a dozen different balls to figure that out. With that being said, this was the first time I've played a round of golf, intentionally, with two different brands AND tracked the results.

 

[ddec]

Nice review staticline...I also use the Tour D. I have enough golf balls where I don't think I will need to buy any more until next summer. I look forward to trying out the Bridgestone balls at the outing this fall.

 

[staticline]

2. One of my biggest concerns in choosing a ball is how quickly a ball will stop on the green after a full shot. Of the four balls, the One Tour and RXS are very similar in terms of putting on the breaks. The RX, however, stops much quicker than the One Tour D.

I've played to One Tour D for that last couple of years and have no problem stopping it where it lands.

3. I haven't gone head-to-head on distance between the One Tour D and the RX, but I wouldn't be surprised if the One Tour D is a bit longer. For me, however, there just isn't enough control from the One Tour D to last in my bag.

I also think the One Tour D is a bit longer, but not more than 10 yards. So, I would consider that immaterial. I didn't notice excessive fade or draw from either ball.

Now the question for everybody to answer is what is the price per dozen savings that makes it worth it to consider the Nikes very seriously? I'm not sure I know the answer to that for myself at this point.

A $13 difference per dozen is significant. That's a 43% increase from the One Tour D to the 330-RX. Granted the One Tour D has been out for a couple of years, while the 330-RX is fairly new...I think. So, may the WOW factor has worn off yet. The One Tour D was initially priced at $45/dozen. And, the 330-RX was at $56/doz (according to tgw.com)

 

[staticline]

Nice review staticline...I also use the Tour D. I have enough golf balls where I don't think I will need to buy any more until next summer. I look forward to trying out the Bridgestone balls at the outing this fall.

Thanks,
After doing this, I went back to the Bridgestone site to look at the other balls. If available, I think I'll try the e6's at the Fall Outing.

 

[thedue]

Great info Sline. I don't have the swing speed that you have, mid 90's, but find the RX and RXS gives me a lower ball flight off the driver and much more "run" in the fairway. Off my iron's I see the same lower trajectory and it seem's odd when the ball hits the green and sticks qiuck after coming in that low. My divots look like craters with these things and the guy's I play with have mentioned it a few times.

I played the Tour D a couple times early this year and can't say there was anything that stood out for me, but course conditions have changed a bunch since then. The one thing I have noticed as a negitive with the RXS lately is in putting. I am leaving a ton of putts short all of a sudden and it's really costing me. Have you noticed the need to push on this ball a bit more in regards to putting?

 

[solidkjames]

Great info Sline. I don't have the swing speed that you have, mid 90's, but find the RX and RXS gives me a lower ball flight off the driver and much more "run" in the fairway. Off my iron's I see the same lower trajectory and it seem's odd when the ball hits the green and sticks qiuck after coming in that low. My divots look like craters with these things and the guy's I play with have mentioned it a few times.

I played the Tour D a couple times early this year and can't say there was anything that stood out for me, but course conditions have changed a bunch since then. The one thing I have noticed as a negitive with the RXS lately is in putting. I am leaving a ton of putts short all of a sudden and it's really costing me. Have you noticed the need to push on this ball a bit more in regards to putting?

This time of year most courses let the greens grow a little longer to let them hold moisture. So the biggest notice I have this time of year is a slower green wherever I go play. Just a thought it could be that or maybe it is the ball but they were rolling fine until late June / early July.

 

[thedue]

This time of year most courses let the greens grow a little longer to let them hold moisture. So the biggest notice I have this time of year is a slower green wherever I go play. Just a thought it could be that or maybe it is the ball but they were rolling fine until late June / early July.

I think your right on SJ, it just get's kind of hard to put all the pieces together. I didn't see this last year, had my best putting ever most of last year, but switched to an insert to slow the ball down a bit which worked great for a long time. Now all the sudden I can't get it there, lol. I even went to my old "hotter" putter and still see the same.

But, getting back to these balls, I'm drinking the kool-aid and loving them.

 

[staticline]

I think your right on SJ, it just get's kind of hard to put all the pieces together. I didn't see this last year, had my best putting ever most of last year, but switched to an insert to slow the ball down a bit which worked great for a long time. Now all the sudden I can't get it there, lol. I even went to my old "hotter" putter and still see the same.

But, getting back to these balls, I'm drinking the kool-aid and loving them.

I didn't feel like I needed to give the ball a little extra when putting. Like SJ said, the greens at this particular course are very slow right now. But, the course is in great shape. Maybe it is due to what he's saying about letting it "grow out", even though they have been mowed. I played a City Mid-Am this past weekend at the same course and the greens were extremely slow then. I usually practice on bent. But, this course is bermuda. The speed difference was very hard to adjust to.

 

[solidkjames]

I didn't feel like I needed to give the ball a little extra when putting. Like SJ said, the greens at this particular course are very slow right now. But, the course is in great shape. Maybe it is due to what he's saying about letting it "grow out", even though they have been mowed. I played a City Mid-Am this past weekend at the same course and the greens were extremely slow then. I usually practice on bent. But, this course is bermuda. The speed difference was very hard to adjust to.

Yeah they still mow them but leave them a bit longer and usually don't cut them as much. I'm having putts stop rolling down hill on me right now. It's frustrating because uphill putts require a hard pop but me and some of the guys were talking at the course last night about this very thing because we had some good rain this week and they mowed them closer yesterday and you could really tell. We have had a terribly hot and dry summer here so our greens are stressing but the Super is doing a good job keeping them in pretty decent shape. Come September these suckers are gonna be beautiful and FAST. So we just have to make it through the tough stretch of summer. The thing is as soon as you start getting used to slow greens the damn things will be rolling at a 12 on downhill putts.