What do you look for in a golf ball? Is it distance? Soft feel? Accuracy? Maybe a urethane cover?
Undoubtedly, you are sitting there nodding your head “YES!”, just like the hopeless golfing addicts which we all are, so, what if I told you that Callaway has a ball which checks all those boxes?
What if I told you it is only $39.99? Do I still have your attention?
Well, what if I told you that ball was the ERC Soft?

2023 Callaway ERC Soft
Now, before you accuse me of trying to pull one over on you, sit back and see why the newest iteration of the ERC Soft does, in fact, check all those aforementioned performance traits off of the list. You see, while on the internet, we golfers tend to believe to have a golf ball that offers all of those things then you absolutely must use a “Tour” style golf ball, but there is much more to it than that.

When ERC Soft came onto the scene Callaway was looking to establish a foothold in what was the fastest growing segment for golf balls. The goal was to produce a ball which would not just fill a hole for them at the sub forty dollar realm, but one that also brought a soft feel, higher launch, straight distance, and control around the greens. The ERC Soft did that, quickly gaining popularity among the golfers who represent the biggest portion of the bell curve.
All of that said, although golfers have enjoyed the soft feel and extreme distance through its two iterations, some feedback fell into questioning just how different it was performance wise from others in the lineup at a lower price point, like the SuperSoft. Yes, the ERC Soft is a three-piece compared to the SuperSoft’s two, but there was something in the equation missing to really set it apart not just among other Callaway golf balls, but this segment as a whole. They believe they have done that now.

Don’t fret, the soft feel and extreme distance is still packed into this three-piece design, it might actually be longer. Callaway started with the core and brought their Hyper Elastic SoftFast Core over from Chrome Soft. This was done because the technology in that core works on a molecular level to increase the resiliency of the material by activating more cross-sections. That resiliency means even more speed potential without any sacrifice of compression or feel changes.

The High Speed Mantle keeps the energy transfer between layers efficient, and that is what ties the SoftFast Core together with what is sure to be the most eye catching improvement, the implementation of Callaway’s new GRIP Urethane Coating on the Hybrid Cover. This coating is focused purely on wedge performance and has a higher “elongation point” (how much stretch it can take before breaking) which quite literally keeps the ball on the wedge face longer to increase spin with a flatter trajectory as well. How much spin? Callaway is claiming around 400 RPM more than the previous version of the ERC Soft, which is a massive increase.

You wanted differentiation? It would certainly appear that Callaway was listening. If that wasn’t enough though, they are also bringing the ERC Soft REVA to market in 2023, which is the same impressive design, but with its unique purple and charcoal colorway for the Triple Track which comes standard on both versions.

The Details
The 2023 Callaway ERC Soft is aimed at the golfer who wants more distance, softer feel, and any extra spin around the green they can get. With the implementation of the new GRIP Urethane, hitting stores on 1/27/23 at $39.99, this golf ball might just take that segment by storm and increase Callaway’s golf ball market share surge even more.
Are you the type of player who could benefit from what Callaway is bringing to the table with the 2023 ERC Soft? Let us know why, or why not, on the THP Community or in the comments below!





[QUOTE=”Muchmore18, post: 11227357, member: 56094″]
The new urathane coating and dagger TT sound fantastic!
Is the change to TT only going here to be in these for the first year like the original TT was on the first version of ERC?
[/QUOTE]
If you are asking if we are changing Chrome Soft, the answer is no….for now.
[QUOTE=”JasonFinleyCG, post: 11231693, member: 19461″]
If you are asking if we are changing Chrome Soft, the answer is no….for now.
[/QUOTE]
That’s exactly what I was asking ? Excited to see what happens eventually!
Will definitely give these a try. Then I’ll be all Calloway except for my Scotty putter.
What are the differences between the ERC Soft and the ERC Soft Reva?
[QUOTE=”JoAnn, post: 11262070″]
What are the differences between the ERC Soft and the ERC Soft Reva?
[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure it’s just the colors, but I could be wrong
[QUOTE=”BuckNasty, post: 11262086, member: 48132″]
Pretty sure it’s just the colors, but I could be wrong
[/QUOTE]
I know the plain Reva’s are “oversized” (like a Supersoft Max) but Callaway documentation doesn’t mention the same for the E.R.C. version, so still unsure.
[QUOTE]
[B]Easy To Launch and More Forgiving[/B]
Features & Benefits: Promotes higher ball flight for increased distance, and more forgiveness for better accuracy, all from an oversized construction that conforms to the rules of golf.
[B]Easy To Hit[/B]
Promotes higher ball flight and consistent contact with an oversized construction that conforms to the rules of golf. REVA is engineered to give you more confidence on every swing.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=”Surfinguru, post: 11262099, member: 68646″]
I know the plain Reva’s are “oversized” (like a Supersoft Max) but Callaway documentation doesn’t mention the same for the E.R.C. version, so still unsure.
[/QUOTE]
Based on [USER=1579]@Jman[/USER] article the ball design is the same but with purple colorway
[QUOTE=”BuckNasty, post: 11262112, member: 48132″]
Based on [USER=1579]@Jman[/USER] article the ball design is the same but with purple colorway
[/QUOTE]
This is correct for the ERC
It is a little confusing between the standard ERC and ERC Reva: it says on their website that the ERC Reva “is especially suited for women who want a new level of performance.” Since they are the same ball except in color, I think I will try the purple/grey Reva. I am going to try that against the Chrome Soft; I have often flip-flopped on ERC/CS and am throwing CSXLS into the mix this spring to see which one I like the most.
As someone who dabbles in Supersoft I’ll have to try these.
As tour balls get more expensive, a ball in the price point of the ERC are going to get more attention & traction for the price sensitive player.
I’m very interested in testing this ball.
[QUOTE=”JDax, post: 11280416, member: 22002″]
As tour balls get more expensive, a ball in the price point of the ERC are going to get more attention & traction for the price sensitive player.
I’m very interested in testing this ball.
[/QUOTE]
Totally agree with you. Even these have gone up this year. I kind of sit in this range $35-$40 for balls. If I could get 36 holes out of one ball, [I]full priced[/I] tour balls might be an option. I did like the ERC when I played it last year. Long, not too much spin on driver, and good feel on putts. I’m just not a big fan of triple track.
Nice write up [USER=1579]@Jman[/USER] tgis would not be a ball I would play but I can see it being option for many people
I played the ERC predominantly last year. It’s an excellent ball for those of us that don’t swing our driver over 100mph. But this ball more than the others is suffering from price creep. Last year I got these ball at around 32 a dozen. Now they are 40. Believe Callaway dropped the ball on their pricing. There are so many options. Might be time to reconsider the E series options Bridgestone.
[QUOTE=”JDax, post: 11280416, member: 22002″]
As tour balls get more expensive, a ball in the price point of the ERC are going to get more attention & traction for the price sensitive player.
I’m very interested in testing this ball.
[/QUOTE]
For me this ball is a bit of a question mark. It doesn’t make sense for what it is at the price point it is. There are a lot of multi-layer urethane covered balls out there at that price or less. Why buy this when there are those options available.
[QUOTE=”templeton80, post: 11280526, member: 53139″]
For me this ball is a bit of a question mark. It doesn’t make sense for what it is at the price point it is. There are a lot of multi-layer urethane covered balls out there at that price or less. Why buy this when there are those options available.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll play devils advocate, since I ordered the new ball and played them last year.
The ERC, for me, was much better in distance and control than the Bridgestone E series and I was not a fan of the Srixon ball. Add in the Triple Track which I love and you had a great ball. Yes, the price point at 35ish last year was better, but if this new 23 version sees the increase spin numbers as proclaimed, I could be getting a ball that plays similar to the ChromeSoft for me at a lower price point.
[QUOTE=”fuffle master, post: 11280536, member: 47863″]
I’ll play devils advocate, since I ordered the new ball and played them last year.
The ERC, for me, was much better in distance and control than the Bridgestone E series and I was not a fan of the Srixon ball. Add in the Triple Track which I love and you had a great ball. Yes, the price point at 35ish last year was better, but if this new 23 version sees the increase spin numbers as proclaimed, I could be getting a ball that plays similar to the ChromeSoft for me at a lower price point.
[/QUOTE]
For sure. But what you like and if it works it works. I am just thinking it is maybe 5-10’ish dollars too much for what category this ball is in.
[QUOTE=”JDax, post: 11280416, member: 22002″]
As tour balls get more expensive, a ball in the price point of the ERC are going to get more attention & traction for the price sensitive player.
I’m very interested in testing this ball.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve had a lot of fun with the current version. I know I give up a little spin around the green but I’m a get it rolling kind of guy so I’m happy to give that up.
Really excited to try this line
[QUOTE=”templeton80, post: 11280526, member: 53139″]
For me this ball is a bit of a question mark. It doesn’t make sense for what it is at the price point it is. There are a lot of multi-layer urethane covered balls out there at that price or less. Why buy this when there are those options available.
[/QUOTE]
It’s basically against the Q-Star Tour which is 5 dollars less. I think it is far better they the E series.
[QUOTE=”templeton80, post: 11280538, member: 53139″]
For sure. But what you like and if it works it works. I am just thinking it is maybe 5-10’ish dollars too much for what category this ball is in.
[/QUOTE]
I think we on the internet think about “categories” much more than the average golfer. Because honestly what is a category. For instance, if we go by cover material, every ball not named Q-STAR Tour is overpriced. If we go by layers, its a mish mash.
I always harken back to the NXT Tour and that was a $30 and then $35 ball that was a surlyn cover and it was the #3 ball sold. Things have gotten a lot more competitive in the space now thankfully.
I think head to head, ERC is longer (for me) than the Q-Star Tour. There’s not a ton of difference on full shot spin. Partial shots around the green is where Q-Star Tour has the advantage with the urethane cover. I’ve gotten good check up with it. That and the price difference (right now anyway) has me giving the edge to Q-Star. YMMV
[QUOTE=”JB, post: 11280603, member: 3″]
I think we on the internet think about “categories” much more than the average golfer. Because honestly what is a category. For instance, if we go by cover material, every ball not named Q-STAR Tour is overpriced. If we go by layers, its a mish mash.
I always harken back to the NXT Tour and that was a $30 and then $35 ball that was a surlyn cover and it was the #3 ball sold. Things have gotten a lot more competitive in the space now thankfully.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with this as well.
[QUOTE=”JDax, post: 11280581, member: 22002″]
It’s basically against the Q-Star Tour which is 5 dollars less. I think it is far better they the E series.
[/QUOTE]
The etc does not have a urethane cover. It is a surlyn cover with a urethane coating. I think they are being sold as the same but are not that same.
[QUOTE=”fuffle master, post: 11280536, member: 47863″]
I’ll play devils advocate, since I ordered the new ball and played them last year.
The ERC, for me, was much better in distance and control than the Bridgestone E series and I was not a fan of the Srixon ball. Add in the Triple Track which I love and you had a great ball. Yes, the price point at 35ish last year was better, but if this new 23 version sees the increase spin numbers as proclaimed, I could be getting a ball that plays similar to the ChromeSoft for me at a lower price point.
[/QUOTE]
I will be playing this ball at some point this year. I too am interested in seeing how it plays compared to the CS. And yellow TT will work for me.
[QUOTE=”templeton80, post: 11280621, member: 53139″]
The etc does not have a urethane cover. It is a surlyn cover with a urethane coating. I think they are being sold as the same but are not that same.
[/QUOTE]
But what if they perform similarly around the green?
[QUOTE=”Scooby45, post: 11280655, member: 62865″]
But what if they perform similarly around the green?
[/QUOTE]
Then wouldn’t that mean there is a cheaper equally or better performing ball?
listen, I am all for options and people playing what they want. This is really a construction material and price point question for me. I am not trying to convince anyone to play or not play this ball.
[QUOTE=”templeton80, post: 11280666, member: 53139″]
Then wouldn’t that mean there is a cheaper equally or better performing ball?
listen, I am all for options and people playing what they want. This is really a construction material and price point question for me. I am not trying to convince anyone to play or not play this ball.
[/QUOTE]
It really is an interesting conversation.
Because there are some cross overs that blue the lines so much. Pro V1 = 3 piece ball urethane cover. Q-STar Tour = 3 piece ball with urethane cover. Also, $20 cheaper per dozen. Then on the other side, we have e12, ERC, Tour Soft, etc which are not urethane covered, some don’t even have a coating and are priced higher than urethane covered.
I believe we are programmed to see that cover and think tour level. Yet for years, a ball like the B330 RX was considered “less than” despite it, because at the time it was so much different (first soft in category) than anything else around.
[QUOTE=”JB, post: 11280676, member: 3″]
It really is an interesting conversation.
Because there are some cross overs that blue the lines so much. Pro V1 = 3 piece ball urethane cover. Q-STar Tour = 3 piece ball with urethane cover. Also, $20 cheaper per dozen. Then on the other side, we have e12, ERC, Tour Soft, etc which are not urethane covered, some don’t even have a coating and are priced higher than urethane covered.
I believe we are programmed to see that cover and think tour level. Yet for years, a ball like the B330 RX was considered “less than” despite it, because at the time it was so much different (first soft in category) than anything else around.
[/QUOTE]
Yes! I agree with this and is kind of what I am getting at.
[QUOTE=”templeton80, post: 11280621, member: 53139″]
The etc does not have a urethane cover. It is a surlyn cover with a urethane coating. I think they are being sold as the same but are not that same.
[/QUOTE]
While I may be a lunatic golf guy to some, I am more of if it works for me I am good to go. If the coating is good enough and I save 10-15 that sounds good to me.
[QUOTE=”fuffle master, post: 11280727, member: 47863″]
While I may be a lunatic golf guy to some, I am more of if it works for me I am good to go. If the coating is good enough and I save 10-15 that sounds good to me.
[/QUOTE]
That’s all you need right there my man..
[QUOTE=”JB, post: 11280676, member: 3″]
It really is an interesting conversation.
Because there are some cross overs that blue the lines so much. Pro V1 = 3 piece ball urethane cover. Q-STar Tour = 3 piece ball with urethane cover. Also, $20 cheaper per dozen. Then on the other side, we have e12, ERC, Tour Soft, etc which are not urethane covered, some don’t even have a coating and are priced higher than urethane covered.
I believe we are programmed to see that cover and think tour level. Yet for years, a ball like the B330 RX was considered “less than” despite it, because at the time it was so much different (first soft in category) than anything else around.
[/QUOTE]
I think golfers (internet golfers in particular) have been conditioned/programmed by advertising to believe that anything other than a top-tier urethane covered “tour” ball is unacceptable for anybody but high handicap muni hacks, and that it diminishes your status as a golfer to play them.
[QUOTE=”BigMac, post: 11280735, member: 3386″]
I think golfers (internet golfers in particular) have been conditioned/programmed by advertising to believe that anything other than a top-tier urethane covered “tour” ball is unacceptable for anybody but high handicap muni hacks, and that it diminishes your status as a golfer to play them.
[/QUOTE]
Its possible. Yet, I would argue that Titleist did very much the opposite with the NXT Tour during its run.
I think Callaway has done very much the opposite with SuperSoft.
I might be in the minority, but I think it is less about advertising and more about peers.
[QUOTE=”JB, post: 11280738, member: 3″]
Its possible. Yet, I would argue that Titleist did very much the opposite with the NXT Tour during its run.
I think Callaway has done very much the opposite with SuperSoft.
I might be in the minority, but[B] I think it is less about advertising and more about peers.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
I get your point, but what caused our peers to form those opinions? 😉
[QUOTE=”BigMac, post: 11280779, member: 3386″]
I get your point, but what caused our peers to form those opinions? 😉
[/QUOTE]
What is used on tour without a shadow of a doubt. And for some you could call that marketing/advertising.
My debate on the subject is simple. We have threads each and every day on “myths” and “misnomers” in golf and the golf ball info in threads is wrong 90% of the time (making up that stat for effect).
[QUOTE=”JB, post: 11280798, member: 3″]
What is used on tour without a shadow of a doubt. And for some you could call that marketing/advertising.
My debate on the subject is simple. We have threads each and every day on “myths” and “misnomers” in golf and the golf ball info in threads is wrong 90% of the time (making up that stat for effect).
[/QUOTE]
From the way I read the description, and the tech specs of this ball on the Callaway web site, it sounds like the “urethane” is IN the paint, as a modifier. They descibe it as “high-elongation paint”. Just the way it reads to me…
[QUOTE=”drb1956, post: 11280831, member: 72342″]
From the way I read the description, and the tech specs of this ball on the Callaway web site, it sounds like the “urethane” is IN the paint, as a modifier. Just the way it reads to me…
[/QUOTE]
You can read our preview above that has all of the information on exactly what is happening with the golf ball.
I have played previous iterations and I found it to be a decent ball, though it lacked the green side control I like in a ball. Be curious to see how the new one measures up. If it does, I could see this becoming a popular ball, given the price point.
[QUOTE=”hadi05, post: 11224515, member: 50784″]
[USER=1579]@Jman[/USER]. Great write up this golf ball has always interested me.
Which player this this golf ball for? A player who wants a soft feeling golf ball with more tour like qualities at a cheaper price?
If you were a consumer how would you know if you were ready to make the step from an ERC Soft to the Chromesoft family (obviously a fitting would tell you too).
[/QUOTE]
I would tend to think so. I play a 2-piece at this time, but would like to move to a 3-piece, for the control around the green. My 2-p is not bad, but maybe I could land closer to the pin, and not so much rollout. This past season I wish I would have played more, and I did try the TM Tour Response, but lost the box over 4 rounds. Little too much spin off the tee. Possibly the ERC could help in that regard, as I did play one that I found on the course, and played it for most of the round, with some success off the tee, and not bad around the green. I still had a couple of boxes of 2-p from a 2-fer deal at DSG, so never thought about buying a box of the ERC. Very much interested in trying this iteration of this ball. I had played the Cally SS for three seasons, and liked it off the tee, great distance, in the fairway most of the time. Saving a few bucks, started buying the Maxfli Softfli, which had the same characteristics as the SS, but could be had with 2-fer deals. Now playing the TF Hammer Control in yellow, which is a decent ball, with good distance, and fairly good manners around the green, and can chip on with some rollout, but leave myself a 6-10 ft. putt., ocassionally getting one within 3 ft. of the pin. This coming season, I will pick up a box of these, and see if I can keep them in the fairway…
[QUOTE=”drb1956, post: 11282286, member: 72342″]
I would tend to think so. I play a 2-piece at this time, but would like to move to a 3-piece, for the control around the green. My 2-p is not bad, but maybe I could land closer to the pin, and not so much rollout. This past season I wish I would have played more, and I did try the TM Tour Response, but lost the box over 4 rounds. Little too much spin off the tee. Possibly the ERC could help in that regard, as I did play one that I found on the course, and played it for most of the round, with some success off the tee, and not bad around the green. I still had a couple of boxes of 2-p from a 2-fer deal at DSG, so never thought about buying a box of the ERC. Very much interested in trying this iteration of this ball. I had played the Cally SS for three seasons, and liked it off the tee, great distance, in the fairway most of the time. Saving a few bucks, started buying the Maxfli Softfli, which had the same characteristics as the SS, but could be had with 2-fer deals. Now playing the TF Hammer Control in yellow, which is a decent ball, with good distance, and fairly good manners around the green, and can chip on with some rollout, but leave myself a 6-10 ft. putt., ocassionally getting one within 3 ft. of the pin. This coming season, I will pick up a box of these, and see if I can keep them in the fairway…
[/QUOTE]
I say give them a go!!!
[QUOTE=”hadi05, post: 11282298, member: 50784″]
I say give them a go!!!
[/QUOTE]
Yup!! Got a $10 card from DSG to use. Gotta get there…
[QUOTE=”drb1956, post: 11282311, member: 72342″]
Yup!! Got a $10 card from DSG to use. Gotta get there…
[/QUOTE]
You can order online! ;):ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
[QUOTE=”hadi05, post: 11282314, member: 50784″]
You can order online! ;):ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
[/QUOTE]
I know. Have a couple of stores within 8 miles..I enjoy going in the store, so I can look at other golf items, clubs, etc…?
[QUOTE=”drb1956, post: 11282315, member: 72342″]
I know. Have a couple of stores within 8 miles..I enjoy going in the store, so I can look at other golf items, clubs, etc…?
[/QUOTE]
[media=giphy]1BZSEGf9nGlScdksrc[/media]
[QUOTE=”drb1956, post: 11282315, member: 72342″]
I know. Have a couple of stores within 8 miles..I enjoy going in the store, so I can look at other golf items, clubs, etc…?
[/QUOTE]
[media=giphy]5tvYHMn6oHYe4ehkus[/media]
I’ve been playing the OG version and the regular CS quite a bit for the past 6 months, and they are similar for me, just a bit more iron and wedge spin with the CS, but the CS is a little shorter off the irons for me.
I also play the OG TM Tour Response ( good ball ), and I find the ERC and CS to feel a bit softer, which I like.
I’ll give the new ERC a try, more spin around the greens is the only thing the OG version lacked a little in.
Disappointed in the 13% price increase, but everyone else has done the same across the board.
[QUOTE=”GolfTravelDude, post: 11280517, member: 53356″]
I played the ERC predominantly last year. It’s an excellent ball for those of us that don’t swing our driver over 100mph. But this ball more than the others is suffering from price creep. Last year I got these ball at around 32 a dozen. Now they are 40. Believe Callaway dropped the ball on their pricing. There are so many options. Might be time to reconsider the E series options Bridgestone.
[/QUOTE]
TM’s Tour Response stripe is now $42.99…!
[QUOTE=”El Rayo X, post: 11295998, member: 12075″]
TM’s Tour Response stripe is now $42.99…!
[/QUOTE]
?
[QUOTE=”just8abug, post: 11280604, member: 12543″]
I think head to head, ERC is longer (for me) than the Q-Star Tour. There’s not a ton of difference on full shot spin. Partial shots around the green is where Q-Star Tour has the advantage with the urethane cover. I’ve gotten good check up with it. That and the price difference (right now anyway) has me giving the edge to Q-Star. YMMV
[/QUOTE]
I found the Q-Star tour to be noticeably shorter than any other ball in this class that I’ve tried. Don’t know why, but it was pretty dramatic for me, especially with my Irons.
Like the new design on the triple track. I am looking forward to [USER=1579]@Jman[/USER]’s testing.
[QUOTE=”El Rayo X, post: 11295998, member: 12075″]
TM’s Tour Response stripe is now $42.99…!
[/QUOTE]
??