WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW: Mizuno launches the Mizuno Pro S and Mizuno Pro X balls, its latest elite multilayer urethane cover offerings. Both models look to increase the potential for distance and ball speed by reducing the thickness of the cover but increasing the thickness of the spin-reducing mantle layer between the core and cover. The balls target two kinds of players with the S offering the softest feel and the X favoring a higher trajectory and steeper landing angle on approach shots, but the new construction leaves both models feeling softer than past Mizuno multilayer urethane models.

PRICE: $48 a dozen.

3 Cool Things

1. The thick of it. The tendency with golf ball stories is to pick apart the individual elements of a golf ball design and think these segments of change constitute the whole truth. A bit like missing the forest for the trees. Because every golf ball engineer will tell you that the parts of a ball are interactive and collaborative. It’s the way the intermediate mantle reacts with pinching the cover to create spin. It’s the way the mantle and core work together to produce both faster speed and less spin. Nevertheless, the Mizuno Pro S and X balls are making a fundamental change compared to their predecessors, RB Tour and RB Tour X. The key differences lie in the thicknesses of the cover and mantle, and both changes are in the pursuit of more ball speed. Specifically, compared to the RB Tour balls, the urethane cover on Mizuno Pro S and X is now 12 percent thinner, while the intermediate mantle layer is six percent thicker. One benefit of a thinner cover is that urethane is not necessarily the fastest component of the ball. Less cover creates more potential for the ball’s ingredients to use more of the stuff that makes it go fast, particularly the core. The thicker mantle also helps both balls to feel softer, while also reducing spin on drives and longer approach shots. The reduced spin is another key component to longer distance.

“Between the S and the X, the X is going to be a higher spinning, slightly faster model,” said Chris Voshall, Mizuno’s head of product, who noted that the X’s higher compression is the differentiator. “The S is very low spin. The big thing on both of these is the feel. They are much softer feeling than the last due to the cover recipe and the thinner cover.” 

2. Flow state. Mizuno’s last set of urethane golf balls introduced a new take on dimples, what is known as an “axial flow” design. The basic premise is that each dimple features a slightly offset or skewed bottom. While it appears to be a randomized tilt, the overall dimple design aims to produce generally a higher flight with driver shots and a flatter flight with wedges. While the RB Tour balls previously featured a 272-dimple pattern, the new Mizuno Pro S and X balls use a new 332-dimple pattern. The ultimate goal of the design is to reduce aerodynamic drag for improved ball velocity.

“The airflow effect is better with larger dimples,” said David Llewellyn, director of research and development for Mizuno USA. “The low point of the dimple keeps air attached, and the dimple pattern is efficient at creating height.”

The latest iteration is aimed at producing more in-flight stability for better distance consistency.

3. Feelings. The two models don’t simply offer two options based on clubhead speed. Rather, the focus of differences is on feel and flight. The Mizuno Pro S is the softer model and targets players who want to focus on feel and finesse around the greens. It favors players who are looking to manipulate flight and work the ball more readily. Meanwhile, the firmer yet still soft Mizuno Pro X offers a higher flight than the Mizuno Pro S with plenty of short-game spin. Specifically, Mizuno characterizes the S as having moderate short-game spin performance with a more penetrating flight. The cover coating also helps to reduce spin. Meanwhile, the X fundamentally encourages a higher trajectory. Its higher flight aims to yield higher landing angles for more green-grabbing control thanks to steeper landing angles.

This article was originally published on golfdigest.com