BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Kenny Powers on January 05, 2013, 10:43:15 PM
-
I've been in and out of the game in the past few years and can't help but notice the shift in the releases from the past two years compared to about five-seven years ago.
Around 2005 or so, Ebonite released the One as their high performance release. For a #15 ball, the RG was 2.46, intermediate diff at .027, and total differential at .056.
In 2012/2013, Ebonite releases the Challenge as their high performance release, and the RG for a #15 ball is 2.51, intermediate differential .017, and total differential at .0.57.
The snippet of my observation from the Ebonite brand is that industry-wide, the rg's have gone up, intermediate differentials have been "lowered", and the total differentials are generally close to the same. I am learning that this trend is actually changing the way I drill recent releases compared to ones from 5-7 years ago.
Today, I find that I do not have to use extremely long pin-pap distances and "weaker" mass bias positions, like I did a handful of years ago. In fact, I find myself being more assertive with pin-pap distances and MB positions to get similar shapes I saw from those "weaker" layouts I had used for asymmetric balls I saw around 2005.
Seems like today's releases allow pro shop operators and most user groups to use layouts that are more familiar to them before the emergence of those asymmetric cores were around in the mid-late 2000s.
Am I seeing this on the same level as many of you guys are? Am I missing something? Is this a good trend? I hope to start a good discussion.
-
Not sure if this is a good trend or not; it just is. I see it (lower intermediate differentials) as an evolution about the thinking regarding Mass Bias/asymmetric cores. Plus coverstocks are getting stronger and that requires higher RG values for everyone except the extremely speed dominant bowler.
I think ball designers have learned that super high Intermediate differentials (above, I'd guess, .020") do not get better results than medium one (.012 - .020) and only require much more restrictive drilling options and usage options. I know of one ball designer who has said privately that any Int. Diff. above .017 is a waste.
There are some very strong oilers with some pretty darned strong backends out there right now, whose intermediate differentials are in the .013 - .017" range, whose RG is no lower than 2.51" and whose RG Diff. is around .045". These numbers were rare for oilers 7- 15 years ago.
-
Its funny cause that's the opposite of how it is with me....i have to use much weaker drills on the newer stuff. The covers are just so much stronger that high end stuff is a waste for me on 95% of the conditions out there.
-
I can remember having conversations with other bowlers back then. One asked me why everything was so "rolly"?. Most balls were designed and advertised to create roll in the oil. They had to do it with cores because the covers were weaker.
Today, the covers are so strong, if they don't raise the RG, the balls roll at your feet. Skid/Flip is now the motto. Even Brunswick is making balls that go longer. Certainly something I never thought they would do.
On the WTBA patterns, I still have to use stuff that will push, even on the longer patterns. If I go with cover strength, I can't carry. I think this is a result of predominately 2 developments: synthetic lanes and abralon surfaces.
To my eye, synthetics are slicker where there is oil, and show more friction on the dry than wood did. To combat this, the ball makers started with these multi-layer sanding finishes that weren't necessary on wood with sandpaper. Single grit abralon finishes seem to promote over/under. I recently purchased a spinner and hope to experiment with these ideas. I don't know for sure if I can prove myself right or wrong here.
-
Covers are also MUCH stronger than they were 7-10 years ago. I took just 3 years off from bowling, and when I threw a couple of new releases that was the first thing that came to mind. Ten years ago, it was almost thought to be "impossible" to make a heavy oiler without the addition of particle. Now there's maybe 5-6 particle balls on the market with none of them coming from any of the major brands. Core tech has gone about as far as it can go with USBC limitations in effect. The cores have to go a little weaker to help create the shape of these highly aggressive resins.
-
...
Ten years ago, it was almost thought to be "impossible" to make a heavy oiler without the addition of particle. Now there's maybe 5-6 particle balls on the market with none of them coming from any of the major brands. ...
I wouldn't be too sure of that. They don't advertise them as such, but I wonder if they don't do that to some degree and I don't just mean mica in some balls.
-
...
Ten years ago, it was almost thought to be "impossible" to make a heavy oiler without the addition of particle. Now there's maybe 5-6 particle balls on the market with none of them coming from any of the major brands. ...
I wouldn't be too sure of that. They don't advertise them as such, but I wonder if they don't do that to some degree and I don't just mean mica in some balls.
Charlest might be right here. I think with the stigma of the past about particle balls, they just don't tell us.
-
IMHO, the trend in weaker intermediate diffs is making it a little easier to match up "strong" asymmetric equipment to bowlers without having to know the blood type of their unborn child.
-
IMHO, the trend in weaker intermediate diffs is making it a little easier to match up "strong" asymmetric equipment to bowlers without having to know the blood type of their unborn child.
:D :D :D :D
-
IMHO, the trend in weaker intermediate diffs is making it a little easier to match up "strong" asymmetric equipment to bowlers without having to know the blood type of their unborn child.
For a lack of better words, this is what I am seeing.
-
I've noticed the trend like the IQ tour to lower rg, lower diff balls.
Of course being a fan of the Columbia ICON 2 for over 10 years while rolling on the left the transition to non particle versions of this type of ball are no surprise to me.
Who needs all that belly in their shots that stronger flare potential balls offer on many shots that don't need it.
Also, as to particle, I believe more balls are particle or a variation close to it than we realize. Not popular to market so they don't.
In addition on the left particle balls can often work well due to our greater amount of head oil. One of my all time favorites a Track Spell and the Icon 2 above still often in my bag!
Sitting ready for action is my Reaction Roll if I ever see a heavy volume league top hat! Yeah!
REgards,
Luckylefty
-
I wanna bowl where you all bowl. I can't hardly throw any asymmetrical stuff cause it reads the lanes to fast.