win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: expected difference between these 2 layouts  (Read 12189 times)

Dave81644

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1662
expected difference between these 2 layouts
« on: January 01, 2015, 04:22:28 PM »
all things being equal
weight, surface, etc
for arguments sake, it will a new symmetrical piece with 2000 OBB finish
layout 1 55x5x50 - which puts the pin in my middle finger

layout 2 - 75x5x25 - pin above ring finger

how much added length can i expect to see from #2
on a normal THS pattern
1' or 2' or?

Logged

 

Dave81644

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1662
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2015, 11:45:45 PM »
great stuff, thanks to all who take the time to answer
Logged

JohnP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2015, 08:37:45 PM »
Charlest, everything you said is true.  However, I was replying to the original conditions posted:

Quote
all things being equal
weight, surface, etc for arguments sake, it will a new symmetrical piece with 2000 OBB finish
layout 1 55x5x50 - which puts the pin in my middle finger

layout 2 - 75x5x25 - pin above ring finger

how much added length can i expect to see from #2
on a normal THS pattern
1' or 2' or?

The OP seemed to be interested in the factors that influence ball reaction according to the dual angle layout procedure, so that's all I addressed.  --  JohnP
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 08:39:32 PM by JohnP »
Logged

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2015, 08:58:07 PM »
This is the problem with this type of voodoo or BS....the layout does NOT create length...it affects the flare and it's potential...surface dictates length and the core effects reaction after it's slowed down...more flare creates more traction and less minimizes...plain & simple
Logged
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24523
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2015, 09:05:08 PM »
Quote from: JohnP on January 03, 2015, 08:37:45 PM
Charlest, everything you said is true.  However, I was replying to the original conditions posted:

Quote
all things being equal
weight, surface, etc for arguments sake, it will a new symmetrical piece with 2000 OBB finish
layout 1 55x5x50 - which puts the pin in my middle finger

layout 2 - 75x5x25 - pin above ring finger

how much added length can i expect to see from #2
on a normal THS pattern
1' or 2' or?

The OP seemed to be interested in the factors that influence ball reaction according to the dual angle layout procedure, so that's all I addressed.  --  JohnP

Sorry for the confusion, John, I wasn't directing my comments at you, but embellishing your comments to Dave81644, who said "Drill angle DICTATED length."

I wanted to make it clear that the Drill angle was only one small factor involved.
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

tdub36tjt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1542
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2015, 09:20:55 PM »
Quote from: JustRico on January 03, 2015, 08:58:07 PM
This is the problem with this type of voodoo or BS....the layout does NOT create length...it affects the flare and it's potential...surface dictates length and the core effects reaction after it's slowed down...more flare creates more traction and less minimizes...plain & simple
[/quot
Quote from: JustRico on January 03, 2015, 08:58:07 PM
This is the problem with this type of voodoo or BS....the layout does NOT create length...it affects the flare and it's potential...surface dictates length and the core effects reaction after it's slowed down...more flare creates more traction and less minimizes...plain & simple

The VAL angle also effects flare. Having a bigger VAL angle decreases the differential thus decreasing flare. But I agree the surface and strength of the cover are far bigger factors in ball reaction.
Logged

Dave81644

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1662
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2015, 10:47:03 PM »
that's actually something i read from Mo a while back on his dual angle layout instructions
A bit of a light bulb went on during all this, i have been to several seminars from some great folks in the industry and every one fo them talks about surface being the most important influence on ball motion, you guys just re-affirmed what i had heard a while ago.

with bowling being a hobby, I don't always remember these details like you guys do,
thanks again
« Last Edit: January 04, 2015, 10:53:58 AM by Dave81644 »
Logged

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2015, 10:52:11 PM »
Surface is the easiest controller of ball reaction
Logged
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

bergman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #23 on: January 04, 2015, 10:51:07 AM »
Ball surface is the biggest factor in creating a specific ball motion but layout indeed will create more length too. A larger drilling angle will absolutely do that.
In this case, layout # 2 will create more length in the same ball/core/surface.
Far from being a "voodoo" concept. Mo Pinel was one of the very best when it comes to ball drillings and he is well respected in the business.
Logged

kidlost2000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5789
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #24 on: January 04, 2015, 11:05:56 AM »
How are you going to make the drilling angle larger on a symmetric core ball? No matter where you set the drill angle the actual end results of the PSA will be in the ball park of the thumb. (draw a line from the pin 6 3/4" through the thumb hole and the psa will be in the ball park after drilling)

The only difference between layout #1 and #2 are the Val angle and the ending location of the cg. The drill angle for both will be almost identical unless a weight hole is added. The weight hole will only move the PSA a small amount changing the drill angle maybe a 1/4" to 1/2" which is making the drill angle smaller.
Logged
…… you can't  add a physics term to a bowling term and expect it to mean something.

Dave81644

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1662
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2015, 07:30:01 AM »
Follow up: i ended up drilling a 2nd gamebreaker2 with the layout as described earlier in this thread, knowing full well what i could expect
i put a fresh 3000 on both pieces
from my eye, the pin up layout is about 1 foot longer and a much quicker response to the friction. the pin in middle finger layout reads sooner and is a bit more of a slower arcing continuous motion.
the differences aren't major, but the estimated extra length s what i was hoping for.
i will probably put the pin in finger back to 2000 and take the higher pin to 4000 or 1000 + polish so i can carry both in my bag
thanks again for the insight
Logged

itsallaboutme

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2015, 09:00:42 AM »
a foot?  Really. 

That is right up there in entertainment value with the guy in the pro shop that insisted  he would be able to tell a difference if his 5/8 inch weight hole was pitched 3/4" instead of 1".
Logged

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2015, 09:09:02 AM »
^^^^^B I N G O^^^^^
Logged
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

Impending Doom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6288
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2015, 09:13:42 AM »
Couldn't these changes in ball roll be made with hand position changes?
Logged

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2015, 09:19:33 AM »
Ya know this is really close but I need like one more foot out of it...move your feet
Logged
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

itsallaboutme

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: expected difference between these 2 layouts
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2015, 10:03:45 AM »
I just want to meet the person who's rev rate and left/right miss variance is small enough to see a 1 foot difference in ball reaction, especially when watching their own ball reaction from the foul line.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »