BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: dR3w on May 18, 2015, 12:06:35 PM
-
I have two questions about "stuff" that I have heard.
First, do modern urethanes react more like reactive resin balls in regards to oil absorption, or more like old school urethane. To the best of my knowledge old generation urethanes balls did not soak up much if any oil. So if you were to throw older urethane balls, then would track onto the backend. The newer urethanes have cores in them and will (when appropriately drilled), continue to flare on the back end. So do modern Urethanes tend to cause carry-down or behave more like reactive resin balls that tend to soak up the oil?
Second, I hear the term, pushing oil around on occasion. As in a right handed bowler who is throwing left to right, will "push" the oil to the outside. Do reactive resin balls, with all their oil absorption ability, and flare actually push oil around? How does this happen? Is this like a tire going through a puddle where water would be splashed (or displaced) to either side of the tire? When I see articles that show the 3-D changes in oil volume, I never see places where they have more oil at the end of the 3 game squad than they do at the start of the squad. Usually they show a giant valley where oil has been absorbed off the lanes. So what exactly is going on?
-
Absorption today deals more with the additives in the oils than pre-2000...the viscosity of today's oils is much thicker also
-
While most balls that are termed "urethane" are probably blends of urethane and resin, the resin is used to reduce the early roll of urethane coverstocks, but the cover is still much closer to true urethane than any other resin. Also the resin with which the blend is made is still a very mild resin version, as far as I have noticed.
So I'd suggest that even today's urethane blends absorb oil extremely slowly. They do act more like plastic in that, if they do pick up the oil, the odds are it will both stay on the ball and/or get deposited further down the lane creating some carrydown. The resin ball will pick up the oil (thus the midlane disappearing on the PBA telecasts with the blue tint in the oil) and absorb it, unless you wipe it off as soon as it comes back from the pin deck. Oil will sit on the urethane ball until you wipe it off, even if it is at home, later that evening.
Back in the mid - late 1990s, I read of a lane oil absorption test, where urethanes and polyester balls absorbed oil at 1/20th of the rate that resin balls absorbed oil. Add to that, that today's (20 years later) resins (seem to me to) absorb oil significantly faster than resins of the 1990s.
-
While most balls that are termed "urethane" are probably blends of urethane and resin, the resin is used to reduce the early roll of urethane coverstocks, but the cover is still much closer to true urethane than any other resin. Also the resin with which the blend is made is still a very mild resin version, as far as I have noticed.
So I'd suggest that even today's urethane blends absorb oil extremely slowly. They do act more like plastic in that, if they do pick up the oil, the odds are it will both stay on the ball and/or get deposited further down the lane creating some carrydown. The resin ball will pick up the oil (thus the midlane disappearing on the PBA telecasts with the blue tint in the oil) and absorb it, unless you wipe it off as soon as it comes back from the pin deck. Oil will sit on the urethane ball until you wipe it off, even if it is at home, later that evening.
Back in the mid - late 1990s, I read of a lane oil absorption test, where urethanes and polyester balls absorbed oil at 1/20th of the rate that resin balls absorbed oil. Add to that, that today's (20 years later) resins (seem to me to) absorb oil significantly faster than resins of the 1990s.
Ok that is good to know. But with a core, and a drilling that promotes flare, a urethane ball will continue to flare on the back end, and thus the carry down would be limited to just the bow-tie rolling on the backend. What looks like a small circle of oil every foot or so. Not like a line of oil that your polyester spare ball would generate?
-
Havent tried all the newer urethane balls, but to me the blue hammer acts a lot like the old blue hammer, at least from a shell perspective. Also, the old urethane balls absorbed oil, partly because we kept them with much more surface than is common today. For example Blue Hammer, circa 1988, came at 500 grit box finish. Those balls definitely soaked up oil as can be attested by the fact that they typically changed from powder blue box to more of a sea blue/green with 30-50 games on them. My newer blue hammer actually seems to absorb less oil than my original simply because I keep it at 4000 wet sanded. Still subject to big time carrydown though.
Urethane and Polyester, are both much more susceptible to carry down than the resin balls of today. They push oil down very quickly, particularly with the high volumes that are used today. Resin balls also push oil, but they absorb more of it to lessen the amount carried down. However the big factor that helps negate the carry down impact is the chemical friction created by the resin additive. Resin balls will skid more easily through the head oil, conserving rotational energy. Then the resin additive makes them chain up and change direction more quickly when they come off the end of the buff, even when they do encounter some carrydown. You can often feel the effect of carrydown with resin on flatter patterns, but it doesn't last very long in the transition
-
Joe Slowinsky has an interesting article on resin balls and oil movement. Says there is no such thing as carrydown. Its all oil depletion. Google it and decide for yourself. Makes sense. When a reactive ball hits dry, no matter where on the lane, it loses energy. It strikes me as odd that so many people say the lanes they bowl on are dry as a bone. Yet they'll talk about carrydown. Like I said, google it and decide for yourself what is happening.
-
Joe Slowinsky has an interesting article on resin balls and oil movement. Says there is no such thing as carrydown. Its all oil depletion. Google it and decide for yourself. Makes sense. When a reactive ball hits dry, no matter where on the lane, it loses energy. It strikes me as odd that so many people say the lanes they bowl on are dry as a bone. Yet they'll talk about carrydown. Like I said, google it and decide for yourself what is happening.
Is this the article you meant?
http://bowlingknowledge.info/images/stories/slowinski_oct_for_slowinski.pdf
-
i have read that article and i tend to agree with it. if you are bowling with people that are using all modern bowling balls that are resin and flaring, taking into account plastic spare balls going down the lane, the amount of carrydown is neglible to ball reaction. if the lane is transitioning and your ball is not finishing, the ball is burning up rather than hitting carrydown
-
I am very familiar with this article and have preached the results to many people, as I mostly believe that what he is saying is true.
I have been practicing on the nationals shot at our center, and it is pretty clear to me that the snappy backends become very tame after 2 or 3 total games played.
I took a picture of the backend of the lane after me and a friend bowled a total of 12 games across two lanes. What I found most surprising was the obvious spare ball lines of oil on the back end. You can definitely see oil depletion at the back of the lane, but maybe not as strong as I would have imagined. I have heard that those little line of oil have no effect on the ball movement until they build up. How long that takes, and "no effect" are probably pretty subjective.
They are using ice at this center, and have the latest and greatest Kegel oil machine on top of AMF synthetics (Probably 7-8 years old).
Here is the photo in Photobucket
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g433/dR3ws3r/Screen%20Shot%202015-05-19%20at%2010.54.07%20AM.png
-
Sorry, but as a guy who learned on lacquer finish, and had to transition to the much harder urethane finishes in the 70's I totally disagree. There is such a thing as carrydown. Oil depletion in the heads certainly maximizes the impact of carrydown, but it definitely exists. The resin ball not only carries down less oil, but it reacts less to the oil that is carried down. Therefore it is fair to say that oil depletion in the heads is a bigger factor on lane transitions than carrydown with resin ball. Not the same as saying there is no such thing as carrydown.
Anyone who doesn't think there is such a thing as carrydown has never bowled on lanes after a bunch of polyester balls have been used all day.
-
Sorry, but as a guy who learned on lacquer finish, and had to transition to the much harder urethane finishes in the 70's I totally disagree. There is such a thing as carrydown. Oil depletion in the heads certainly maximizes the impact of carrydown, but it definitely exists. The resin ball not only carries down less oil, but it reacts less to the oil that is carried down. Therefore it is fair to say that oil depletion in the heads is a bigger factor on lane transitions than carrydown with resin ball. Not the same as saying there is no such thing as carrydown.
Anyone who doesn't think there is such a thing as carrydown has never bowled on lanes after a bunch of polyester balls have been used all day.
Bob is 100% correct.
I asked the same question in-house several months back. So with a wry smile our maintenance guy walked me down to the last 20 feet of the end lane in the house. The visual streaks of oil resulting from carry down were unmistakable.
These myths get perpetrated and take on a life of their own. It's ironic because it's so easy to check out.
-
Sorry, but as a guy who learned on lacquer finish, and had to transition to the much harder urethane finishes in the 70's I totally disagree. There is such a thing as carrydown. Oil depletion in the heads certainly maximizes the impact of carrydown, but it definitely exists. The resin ball not only carries down less oil, but it reacts less to the oil that is carried down. Therefore it is fair to say that oil depletion in the heads is a bigger factor on lane transitions than carrydown with resin ball. Not the same as saying there is no such thing as carrydown.
Anyone who doesn't think there is such a thing as carrydown has never bowled on lanes after a bunch of polyester balls have been used all day.
Bob is 100% correct.
I asked the same question in-house several months back. So with a wry smile our maintenance guy walked me down to the last 20 feet of the end lane in the house. The visual streaks of oil resulting from carry down were unmistakable.
These myths get perpetrated and take on a life of their own. It's ironic because it's so easy to check out.
+2 ... I have to agree with both avabob and Steven
-
Bob is 100% correct.
I asked the same question in-house several months back. So with a wry smile our maintenance guy walked me down to the last 20 feet of the end lane in the house. The visual streaks of oil resulting from carry down were unmistakable.
These myths get perpetrated and take on a life of their own. It's ironic because it's so easy to check out.
I will say that if you read the article, he says that "at 44 feet there is little to no carrydown in today’s game. In fact, there was less than 2 units of oil past the end of the pattern after 15 games and practice. This is not enough oil to alter ball motion with today’s covers."
It isn't a question of whether there is oil that gets picked up and moved into the backend, because obviously from visual inspection it is. it is a question of whether that alters ball motion. According to the author it doesn't.
Why not get your maintenance guy to put down a 40 ft, 2 unit shot front to back and side to side. My guess is you will feel like you are bowling in the parking lot.
I agree with avabob in his post, that oil is carried down, but it isn't a factor, or much of a factor. The exception being a group of people using plastic and perhaps urethane ... not something I see in league, or expect to see at Nationals.
-
I agree with avabob in his post, that oil is carried down, but it isn't a factor, or much of a factor. The exception being a group of people using plastic and perhaps urethane ... not something I see in league, or expect to see at Nationals.
It seems to be a much larger factor if you are bowling in any senior leagues. Many of them use plastic or urethane because of needing lighter weighted balls or needing something for their slower ball speed.
-
I also agree that on longer patterns carrydown is minimal. The reason is that even on very long patterns the oil ends at less than 30 feet. The last 12-18 feet is buff out that in effect carries oil down more evenly than balls will. One reason I really like long patterns is that the transitions are so much simpler. Converesely Short patterns show the biggest impact of carrydown in the initial transition. Cant remember how many times I have seen guys on 38 foot patterns throwing a few shots and saying they have free back end everywhere. That last for a few shots as oil tracks right out toward the break point
-
as you will see in the article and my post, no one saide anything about no carrydown with plastic and urethane. in the MODERN game with resin covers and dynamic cores there is no such thing as carrydown affecting ball motion. if you are bowling with a bunch of plastic and urethane balls such as in younger youth, mixed, senior leagues or short pattern tournaments where more people use urethane and plastic regularly you WILL see carrydown and it WILL affect ball motion.
again in the modern game of bowling there is a neglible amount of carry down that does not affect ball motion and it would be fair to say there is no such thing as carrydown
-
as you will see in the article and my post, no one saide anything about no carrydown with plastic and urethane. in the MODERN game with resin covers and dynamic cores there is no such thing as carrydown affecting ball motion. if you are bowling with a bunch of plastic and urethane balls such as in younger youth, mixed, senior leagues or short pattern tournaments where more people use urethane and plastic regularly you WILL see carrydown and it WILL affect ball motion.
again in the modern game of bowling there is a neglible amount of carry down that does not affect ball motion and it would be fair to say there is no such thing as carrydown
This is only in my house, but 90+% of the leagues are youth, mixed, women or senior. There is only one mens league. So for the majority, there may be an issue in play depending on the ratio of resin vs non-resin balls in use. I know it is not an issue with the mens league. :)
-
Never let science get in the way of perpetuating old myths. ::) Rubber and lacquer = carrydown. Resin and lane oil = depletion. Same result, different causes. Kegel has probably done more research into bowling than even the USBC.
-
I learned on lacquer with rubber balls. Never saw anything that acted like carrydown in those days. First carrydown I saw was when hard urethane finishes replaced the lacquer. Bowlers had a fit trying to play the carrydown transitions. Lanemen started oiling shorter, loading up the heads, and stripping the back ends all the time. In hindsight that was the worst thing to do. One local lane man who was a good friend of mine even consulted with the tour lane men on how to put playable shots out. He oiled to about 20 feet, but buffed out to 42 feet ( with a heavy crown ). He had the most playable shot in town except for houses that totally walled them up off the corner. Indeed, that was the start of the wet dry top hat conditions that still predominate today. Without some type of heavy crown most of the scratch bowlers had a terrible time dealing with the carry down environment that was totally new to us.
-
I learned on lacquer with rubber balls. Never saw anything that acted like carrydown in those days. First carrydown I saw was when hard urethane finishes replaced the lacquer. Bowlers had a fit trying to play the carrydown transitions. Lanemen started oiling shorter, loading up the heads, and stripping the back ends all the time. In hindsight that was the worst thing to do. One local lane man who was a good friend of mine even consulted with the tour lane men on how to put playable shots out. He oiled to about 20 feet, but buffed out to 42 feet ( with a heavy crown ). He had the most playable shot in town except for houses that totally walled them up off the corner. Indeed, that was the start of the wet dry top hat conditions that still predominate today. Without some type of heavy crown most of the scratch bowlers had a terrible time dealing with the carry down environment that was totally new to us.
I learned on those same conditions also plus back in my time, the oil was applied with a mop and not a lane machine.
-
There are many factors here, but the pattern used in the article had a total volume of 22 mls, which is not a lot... The article was also published nearly eight years ago. Not exactly last month.
By comparison, the center I manage has a THS pattern with a total volume of 29 mls (40 ft), and I see carrydown regularly as I inspect the back-ends after various leagues. Today's lane oils are also "more slick" than ever.
Our senior leagues have the most carrydown, followed by the women's leagues, the mixed leagues, and finally, the more competitive in that order. It's a direct result of the amount of polyester (and even rubber) balls AND where they're thrown. Seniors and women's leagues roll more of the harder shell balls through the middle of the pattern (where the higher concentration of lane conditioner exists), and more frequently.
Therefore "myth of carrydown" depends... It's very real for some of us, and I won't deny what my eyes can see.
-
One other thing on carry down. Volume of oil as almost doubled since the beginning of the resin era. That is why you see such dramatic carry down when a bunch of plastic balls are used. The bigger the puddle the greater the carry down.
-
I too, learned to bowl back in the days of lacquer finishes and rubber/polyester balls.
I also worked in a local bowling center in those days. I used to be responsible for
conditioning the lanes. We used to oil the lanes with an old Brunswick hand-held
spray applicator. Around 1969-70, we switched to using the Brunswick B-90 lane
oiling machine. In those days the combination of porous lacquer finishes plus the fact that we applied much less (oil) volume than what we see today, resulted in extremely
negligible oil carrydown. In short, oil carrydown was pretty much a non-issue.
In fact, we used to strip the entire lanes (clean) at most, only twice a week.
If we did that today, there would be a ton of carrydown oil downlane.
At the start of the 1973 fall league season, our center replaced lacquer with much harder polyurethane finishes. The results were dramatic. Suddenly, carrydown
became a factor. It was as if the lane surfaces were replaced with oil-slick concrete.
Scores plummeted and numerous lane maintenance problems arose overnight, including an epidemic of out-of-ranges and oil-soaked ball return wheels. The harder surfaces, combined with the hard rubber and plastic balls acted like snow
plows--pushing the oil downlane. The response to this resulted in the birth of the
"soaker" balls, shorter oil patterns and widespread lane blocking. All of these
had a huge impact on how the game is being played today. It has resulted in
the equipment revolution we see now. Balls with exotic cores and coverstocks
and lanes dressed with oil ratios of 10:1 (and greater) becoming the norm these
today.
In response to this, today's lane oils are "slicker" and they are being applied
in much greater volumes than in the lacquer days--in some cases over 4 times
the volumes used back then. Granted, the higher performance balls today
flare more and absorb more oil than balls back then, but not nearly enough
to overcome the oil volumes applied nowadays. Carrydown is still there, although less
than in the past--but it still exists and it still is a scoring factor. Throw in the use of plastic house and spare balls and carrydown can actually be worse than it was in the in the immediate post-lacquer era.
-
Great historical perspective Bergman. That was exactly our experience in my area. Also, as you said, the attempts to put out playable conditions on the much harder urethane lane finishes was a huge factor in the super walled conditions that we still see today as house shots.
Just one other little anecdote. In 1970 I was bowling on my college team, and bowled a scratch league in an off campus center. The place was notoriously low scoring, and I busted my tale only to average about 188 with my hard rubber ball. Frustrating thing was a guy who was averaging about 195 throwing a full roller and using a Crown Jewel. I knew the guy couldn't play with me on most conditions. Several years later in my home house after leaving college I was talking to the lane man about the problems of urethane lane finish. He told me that we had been bowling on it since 1970 because Brunswick used his house as a test market for Astro Lane finish, the hardest of the urethane finishes. He did a good job of building a track ( wall if you like ) to compensate, and scores weren't too bad. However, he also said the house I bowled in at college was also a test house and I had been bowling on Astro lane there as well. Shortly therafter I got my first Columbia White dot and raised my average 14 pins in my home house. When the softer Shore Ds came out, scores really went through the roof in the urethane houses that were putting out wall shots.
-
Great story, Avabob. I had an undrilled Shore D still in the original box that I
just parted with recently. I had it for almost 40 years. It still had the little yellow
sticker attached to it that stated that the ball was not under warranty (due to its
very soft cover). About 4 years ago, a durometer reading consistently measured
it in the low to mid 60's on the scale, despite having sat in an unheated garage for
many years. I remember drilling them and how "gummy" in texture they were.
In fact, we called them "gumballs"-lol.
Speaking of the White Dots that preceded the Shore Ds, they indeed, performed
better than the majority of the rubbers balls that were in production at the time.
For those of us who are old enough to remember, it was the great Don "Koko" Johnson that put Columbia 300 on the map with his Columbia (White Dot) Caramel.
Prior to this, many of the guys around my neck of the woods were reluctant to
go to polyester because they were not yet convinced that they would be better performers than the traditional black rubber balls. Still others felt that the colorful plastic balls were too effeminate for their macho image.
Bowling, like practically everything else, has come a long, long way!
-
I had the opportunity to bowl on lacquer a couple of times after I went to the White Dots. Interestingly there really wasn't much difference in reaction between rubber and polyester ( even softer polyester ) on lacquer. However on urethane, as you say the white dots really outperformed rubber much of the time.
-
One thing to consider when asking if Urethane or Polyester balls create carry down is: are the balls drilled with a zero flare or a high flare layout?
In the old days drilling patterns were not necessarily created to increase flare potential and many of the early balls had no dynamic core. So when you rolled a urethane ball down the lane it had one oil line it kept rolling over again and again and the oil would be carried down like the ball was a paint roller.
But a modern urethane ball with a dynamic core drilled with a high flare layout will allow each oil line to have its own stripe on the ball and they will only meet at the center of the bow tie. So actually the high flare urethane ball is removing oil from the lane! And when it comes back and you wipe that oil off your ball it is gone from the lane forever. So in effect a urethane ball can take just as much oil off the lane as a reactive ball.
I have personally used my Hammer Widow spare ball with a super high flare layout as a strike ball and after a game or so I successfully gouged out a dry line up the lane with it.
Carry down does still occur with any ball type, but high flare layouts will always minimize this effect and wiping the ball after each throw will assure any oil it picks up will not get back on the lane.
-
Joe Slowinsky has an interesting article on resin balls and oil movement. Says there is no such thing as carrydown. Its all oil depletion. Google it and decide for yourself. Makes sense. When a reactive ball hits dry, no matter where on the lane, it loses energy. It strikes me as odd that so many people say the lanes they bowl on are dry as a bone. Yet they'll talk about carrydown. Like I said, google it and decide for yourself what is happening.
The ball doesn't lose energy - Except for work completed.
KE = 1/2 * M * V^2 + 1/2 * I * W^2 - Work Completed
KE = Kinetic Energy
M = Mass
V = Velocity
I = Moment of Inertia
W = Rev Rate per second
The force from friction causing the ball to lose velocity also causes the ball to increase rev rate.
I had to come back to this due to an oversight on my part.
If for example you're ball hooks 10 boards compared to if it had traveled straight, the amount of work completed is the amount required to carry the ball 10 boards sideways.
So technically it does lose some energy, but a rather small amount compared to the amount required to get the ball going 15 mph for example.
-
Joe Slowinsky has an interesting article on resin balls and oil movement. Says there is no such thing as carrydown. Its all oil depletion. Google it and decide for yourself. Makes sense. When a reactive ball hits dry, no matter where on the lane, it loses energy. It strikes me as odd that so many people say the lanes they bowl on are dry as a bone. Yet they'll talk about carrydown. Like I said, google it and decide for yourself what is happening.
The ball doesn't lose energy.
KE = 1/2 * M * V^2 + 1/2 * I * W^2
KE = Kinetic Energy
M = Mass
V = Velocity
I = Moment of Inertia
W = Rev Rate per second
The force from friction causing the ball to lose velocity also causes the ball to increase rev rate.
If the balls linear velocity is slower than its tangential velocity, then the rev rate will decrease as it encounters friction. Though there aren't many bowlers who can achieve those conditions.
-
Correct, however the tangential velocity will always decrease when the ball encounters friction.
Also, kinetic energy (KE) in the case of a rolling bowling ball is not conserved but momentum is (conserved). KE, or in this case, mechanical energy, would be conserved absent friction.
As for angular velocity, this value is directly proportional to the ball's moment of inertia
and the amount of torque supplied by the bowler's hand. An increase in any (or both) of these quantities alone, are what determine the amount of "revs" being generated.
I can generate the same amount of revs statically with my hand as I can if I let the ball travel down the lane off my hand. The forward motion of the ball down the lane simply determines WHEN the ball's rotational inertia reaches a "maximum value", due to
the velocity created by the bowler and the effects of friction, lane topography, etc.
-
Correct, however the tangential velocity will always decrease when the ball encounters friction.
If we assume a normal off hand release of 15 mph and 300 rpms, here is what you get:
linear velocity = 15 mph or 22 ft/s
tangential velocity = circumference of ball (27.002 in)/12 *300 rpm/60 = 11.25 ft/s (assuming end over end roll)
Thus the linear velocity is higher than the tangential velocity, meaning the ball is "skidding". As the ball encounters friction, the two velocities will approach an identical value somewhere in the middle. The linear velocity will decrease and the tangential velocity will increase (gain rpms).
To look at it another way, imagine a ball traveling 15 mph or 22 ft/s (rolling end over end and equal linear and tangential velocity), it would have 586 rpm.
-
Joe Slowinsky has an interesting article on resin balls and oil movement. Says there is no such thing as carrydown. Its all oil depletion. Google it and decide for yourself. Makes sense. When a reactive ball hits dry, no matter where on the lane, it loses energy. It strikes me as odd that so many people say the lanes they bowl on are dry as a bone. Yet they'll talk about carrydown. Like I said, google it and decide for yourself what is happening.
The ball doesn't lose energy.
KE = 1/2 * M * V^2 + 1/2 * I * W^2
KE = Kinetic Energy
M = Mass
V = Velocity
I = Moment of Inertia
W = Rev Rate per second
The force from friction causing the ball to lose velocity also causes the ball to increase rev rate.
If the balls linear velocity is slower than its tangential velocity, then the rev rate will decrease as it encounters friction. Though there aren't many bowlers who can achieve those conditions.
Correct, for those rare individuals who can achieve that, as the rev rate decreases, the linear velocity increases.
-
It is a myth that your need a 14 or 15 lb ball to be successful as I have 30-40 200s with 10 pound balls.
-
It is a myth that your need a 14 or 15 lb ball to be successful as I have 30-40 200s with 10 pound balls.
If anyone has seen a video of you bowling, they would question your characterization of being successful.
Had you started bowling in the days of wood lanes, you wouldn't have 30-40 200 games, because the proprietors would have you kicked out due to the damage you would be doing to wood lanes.
A 15-20 foot two handed shot put is not bowling.
-
+1
-
Old urethane balls did not have dynamic cores. Back in the day you could like at a ball that had lots of games on it and narrow line would develop over the players track, of lots of little dents from all the shots.
Since balls did not flare they would pick up oil in the front of lane and deposit it on the back.
New urethanes have dynamic cores, so when they pick up oil in the front, at the back that oil on ball isnt' rolling on the lanes.
So new urethanes will effect lane play like the resins. strip oil and deposit a little on back end in small strips in the few places the oil on ball happens to roll on lanes.
This idea that urethane moves oil down lane and resins strip is a huge misconception. Unless you use and old urethane or a new one w/ very weak drilling or lack of dynamic more. I guess Mix from Storm would move oil down lane, or something else w/ a very weak drilling.
I have a Storm Supernatural and Visionary Crow and they both strip oil.
-
Old urethane balls did not have dynamic cores. Back in the day you could like at a ball that had lots of games on it and narrow line would develop over the players track, of lots of little dents from all the shots.
Since balls did not flare they would pick up oil in the front of lane and deposit it on the back.
New urethanes have dynamic cores, so when they pick up oil in the front, at the back that oil on ball isnt' rolling on the lanes.
So new urethanes will effect lane play like the resins. strip oil and deposit a little on back end in small strips in the few places the oil on ball happens to roll on lanes.
This idea that urethane moves oil down lane and resins strip is a huge misconception. Unless you use and old urethane or a new one w/ very weak drilling or lack of dynamic more. I guess Mix from Storm would move oil down lane, or something else w/ a very weak drilling.
I have a Storm Supernatural and Visionary Crow and they both strip oil.
One simple way to make a pancake weight block ball flare when drilling over the label, is to drill the thumb normal, and the fingers very shallow.
You have to plan ahead because shallow fingers will result in more finger weight than normal depth, so move the CG accordingly before drilling.
Instead of the ball absorbing the oil, you will need to wipe the surface each throw.
I shot 300 with a Storm Polar Ice, which is the same as the Mix, just a generation earlier.