BallReviews
Equipment Boards => Radical => Topic started by: newguy on October 11, 2016, 11:43:46 AM
-
Check out the new Fix with the shapeshifter core. Our new video is up on our face
book page and info on the ball is up on our Website.
We are also releasing a Jackpot Solid. Same popular core, new stronger solid cover.
WOW that's Radical.
-
Interesting to say the least.
Whats the purpose of The Fix when you already have the Guru Supreme and Xeno?
-
new technology. Core can be either a strong asymmetrical or a weak symmetrical and every where in between, it fits a different motion and performance.
-
new technology. Core can be either a strong asymmetrical or a weak symmetrical and every where in between, it fits a different motion and performance.
I'm looking forward to seeing more of it then. The Jackpot Solid fits my needs a little better right now as a compliment to a Ridiculous Pearl
-
Looks very interesting and looking forward to getting one or two of them to try out the different layout options...
-
new technology. Core can be either a strong asymmetrical or a weak symmetrical and every where in between, it fits a different motion and performance.
But strong cover, yes?
-
yes strong and new cover technology as well.
-
If I'm reading the updated ball chart correctly a few balls have also been discontinued. Both Rack Attacks, the Rave On, the Primo Solid, and the Guru Master. I'm really liking the current lineup though. Lots of dynamic stuff in there.
-
I'm most surprised to see a motion hole layout under the asymmetric options. Would the hole be placed in the same manner as symmetrics? I know Mo shied away from recommending the layout on asymmetric balls. Just wondering if anything has changed as I don't see anything about the placement of the hole on the drilling sheet.
-
Same rules apply on drilling a motion hole.
Remember the Fix is both symmetrical and asymmetrical so you can drill it with a motion hole and not have to worry about the placement. It is totally new technology so all of the previous rules may not apply to the Shapeshifter core.
-
Same rules apply on drilling a motion hole.
Remember the Fix is both symmetrical and asymmetrical so you can drill it with a motion hole and not have to worry about the placement. It is totally new technology so all of the previous rules may not apply to the Shapeshifter core.
Yes I know, but I saw that the motion hole drilling was under the asymmetric layouts and it looks like the pin placement differs a bit from the normal symmetric motion hole layout. I'm particularly interested in that layout because I'm now fairly high track and I've loved the motion hole on every ball I've put it on - the most recent being the Ridiculous Pearl
-
you can drill it the same as the Ridiculous pearl.
-
Same rules apply on drilling a motion hole.
Remember the Fix is both symmetrical and asymmetrical so you can drill it with a motion hole and not have to worry about the placement. It is totally new technology so all of the previous rules may not apply to the Shapeshifter core.
Yes I know, but I saw that the motion hole drilling was under the asymmetric layouts and it looks like the pin placement differs a bit from the normal symmetric motion hole layout. I'm particularly interested in that layout because I'm now fairly high track and I've loved the motion hole on every ball I've put it on - the most recent being the Ridiculous Pearl
it was my impression when the motion hole came out that the benefit was to make a symmetric behave more asymetrically. the layout would raise the RG and the intermediate diff causing more length and shorter hook zone. so the motion hole layout on the assymetric side of the drill sheet would make sense
-
Same rules apply on drilling a motion hole.
Remember the Fix is both symmetrical and asymmetrical so you can drill it with a motion hole and not have to worry about the placement. It is totally new technology so all of the previous rules may not apply to the Shapeshifter core.
Yes I know, but I saw that the motion hole drilling was under the asymmetric layouts and it looks like the pin placement differs a bit from the normal symmetric motion hole layout. I'm particularly interested in that layout because I'm now fairly high track and I've loved the motion hole on every ball I've put it on - the most recent being the Ridiculous Pearl
it was my impression when the motion hole came out that the benefit was to make a symmetric behave more asymetrically. the layout would raise the RG and the intermediate diff causing more length and shorter hook zone. so the motion hole layout on the assymetric side of the drill sheet would make sense
Yes, that is true. It is just that Mo stopped recommending using motion hole on asymmetric balls. This drilling is now used on the ball in "asymmetric mode", and the pin placement differs a little from the symmetric layout. My guess is that this ball was designed/tested so motion hole would work.
Previously, I seem to recall the recommendation of placing the hole 11" from the pin on asymmetrics instead of the 10" recommendation on symmetrics. That is why I asked about the hole placement. Nothing is mentioned in the Fix's motion hole layout about the actual hole, where the symmetric ball drilling sheets have everything explained.
I know Phil posted that I can drill it the same as my Ridiculous Pearl, but I will probably follow the drill sheet and go 85 x 3 3/4" x 30 with the pin placement. And unless I hear otherwise before it is drilled, I'll have the hole placed 10" from wherever the pin ends up - adjusted for track flare, if needed. It may end up that the pin is pretty close to the ridiculous pearl anyway. I now use the 5" and over layout. I'm guessing the layout d will put the pin in a similar spot, but maybe more pin up.
Looking forward to this ball with motion hole. Ridiculous Pearl was amazing last night during league -first time I used it for all 3 games. I usually pull it out later on, if at all. Based on the video, the Fix looks just as angular with an asymmetric layout. Should be great 1-2 on heavier oil.
-
You are over thinking what marketing is selling you.
The intermediate diff is .007 which is still considered symmetric. This is prior to drilling. Other brands have bowling balls with int diffs in the .005 to .007 range that when drilled can be as asymmetric or symmetric as what you are reading about.
Anyone with blueprint software access could easily give you examples.
-
You are over thinking what marketing is selling you.
The interstate diff is .007 which is still considered symmetric. This is prior to drilling. Other brands have bowling balls with int diffs in the .005 to .007 range that when drilled can be as asymmetric or symmetric as what you are reading about.
Anyone with blueprint software access could easily give you examples.
Normally I would agree with you. But this is Phil and Mo. Mo understands ball science better than most. And if you check the drilling sheet: http://radicalbowling.com/uploads/downloads/Radical_Drilling_Instructions-The_Fix.pdf you will see that you are way off base. The numbers drastically change depending on drilling. They shaped the core in a way to get these vastly different numbers.
I'm going to trust Radical on this over just about anyone else. Clearly, numbers change with other cores, but by how much? And how would you ever know how much without blueprint software (and does that software even include all manufacturers at this point)?
Regardless of all that, I just asked a simple question about the motion hole drilling - particularly where to place the hole. Seeing how the drill sheet uses a different layout for motion hole than with symmetric balls. Not sure how that is overthinking or falling into a marketing trap. Mo must have picked this new layout for a reason. But yeah, it's marketing...
-
You are over thinking what marketing is selling you.
The interstate diff is .007 which is still considered symmetric. This is prior to drilling. Other brands have bowling balls with int diffs in the .005 to .007 range that when drilled can be as asymmetric or symmetric as what you are reading about.
Anyone with blueprint software access could easily give you examples.
Normally I would agree with you. But this is Phil and Mo. Mo understands ball science better than most. And if you check the drilling sheet: http://radicalbowling.com/uploads/downloads/Radical_Drilling_Instructions-The_Fix.pdf you will see that you are way off base. The numbers drastically change depending on drilling. They shaped the core in a way to get these vastly different numbers.
I'm going to trust Radical on this over just about anyone else. Clearly, numbers change with other cores, but by how much? And how would you ever know how much without blueprint software (and does that software even include all manufacturers at this point)?
Regardless of all that, I just asked a simple question about the motion hole drilling - particularly where to place the hole. Seeing how the drill sheet uses a different layout for motion hole than with symmetric balls. Not sure how that is overthinking or falling into a marketing trap. Mo must have picked this new layout for a reason. But yeah, it's marketing...
Blueprint is proprietary to Ebi brands so it will never include other brands. Your question has been answered prior to and you still doubted others replies. The ball is symmetric. That's the drilling you'd use for the motion hole layout.
Ive personally used the free demo version of the software and spent many hours playing with different layouts, different weight hole locations, and focused on the affects of the core numbers before and after drilling.
If you look behind the curtain there is no magic Wizard. Try the free software for yourself and see.
-
Have you even looked at the drilling sheet? Are you saying Mo doesn't know what he's talking about? (And Phil as well?) Yes, I could drill it the same way I have drilled other symmetric balls with motion hole. That wasn't the question here. The question is directed solely towards the asymmetric layout D on the drilling sheet. How hard is that to understand?
Blueprint has no business in this discussion if it only deals with ebonite balls, especially when it cannot tell me where to place the motion hole based on layout D on the drill sheet.
Phil did answer me and say that I can drill it the same as my Ridiculous Pearl. That is perfectly fine. However, there has to be a reason that layout D exists. And I'm interested in trying it for myself. So again, I wanted to know if the motion hole placement remains at 10" from the pin with that layout. Simple question.
Why does everything have to turn into a debate and/or company bashing? Just stay out of the discussion if it does not suit your beliefs - unless the topic actually calls for a debate.
-
And people wonder why there isn't a lot of activity on this website anymore. Sad.
-
I think you've gone a little too far Jazlar. If you're really that curious about the motion hole placement, Mo himself is very receptive to questions and it would be simpler to go straight to him with your question.
I agree with IgniteBowling that you are over thinking it a bit.
Blueprint does belong in the discussion as it can show you other examples from similar balls. Pin up layouts will increase Int. Diff hence the "asymmetric" option with The Fix. Pin down layouts don't increase Int. Diff the same way so you end up with "symmetric" layouts.
It's not a perfect science as different core shapes can have different values with the same layouts.
I don't even see anything mentioning a distance on the drilling sheet for the motion hole
-
As someone else previously mentioned, the layout is under asymmetric because it's making the core very asymmetric after drilling.
That's why it's where it is on the sheet and why Phil told you to drill the same as the Ridiculous Pearl.
-
The numbers shown on the Radical Drilling Instructions for the Fix are nothing extraordinary. Mo has provided data in the past with similar results from the Gradient Line documentation.
Core looks eerily similar to the CFT core from 900 Global.
-
The numbers shown on the Radical Drilling Instructions for the Fix are nothing extraordinary. Mo has provided data in the past with similar results from the Gradient Line documentation.
Core looks eerily similar to the CFT core from 900 Global.
Don't say that! then these people will figure it out, it's all a conspiracy bro.....
the core shape on the fix, just the shape, looks similar to a ball from LORD FIELD, Pin Hacker..
http://www.lordfield.com/en/products/pin_hacker_ball_view.php
-
Or the core from the BVP Wizard, Punisher, Rampage.
-
The numbers shown on the Radical Drilling Instructions for the Fix are nothing extraordinary. Mo has provided data in the past with similar results from the Gradient Line documentation.
Core looks eerily similar to the CFT core from 900 Global.
Shots fired. Where's Nick Siefers when you need him??
-
I don't understand what people can't get here. The traditional motion hole layout for symmetrics has been to place the pin in 2 specific spots, depending on how far over your PAP is. That doesn't mean those spots are set in stone, but they are what is recommended.
In this case, the pin is being placed using a dual angle layout. I was simply asking if the motion hole is still placed the same way as with the previous method. I was not looking for debate over how to lay it out. And I fail to see how blueprint has anything to do with the layout in the drilling sheet and what I asked. It has nothing to do with that.
Yes, I can follow the previous method. Yes, you could always deviate from the previous method. Yes, I have moved the pin around on previous motion holed balls. Yes, the symmetric core become asymmetric once it is drilled into. None of that has anything to do with layout D and what I asked.
It seems like everyone just wants to bash companies about their marketing - of which it appears that most equate marketing with lying. Why this crap was brought up as a response to my simple question is beyond me. Perhaps I should have asked on another forum where they actually care about precise layouts and the methods behind them. No wonder industry professionals (and others) have been chased away from this site.
-
Phil:Same rules apply on drilling a motion hole.Remember the Fix is both symmetrical and asymmetrical so you can drill it with a motion hole and not have to worry about the placement. It is totally new technology so all of the previous rules may not apply to the Shapeshifter core.
JVS: Yes I know, but I saw that the motion hole drilling was under the asymmetric layouts and it looks like the pin placement differs a bit from the normal symmetric motion hole layout. I'm particularly interested in that layout because I'm now fairly high track and I've loved the motion hole on every ball I've put it on - the most recent being the Ridiculous Pearl.
Phil: you can drill it the same as the Ridiculous pearl.
JVS: I know Phil posted that I can drill it the same as my Ridiculous Pearl, but I will probably follow the drill sheet and go 85 x 3 3/4" x 30 with the pin placement.
Your hang up is on the pictures, we get that now. No where listed in most of the drill sheet pictures is what the pap being used for the pictures is. This is common among many brands and has caused hang ups for years because when you drill it for a bowler based of their pap and the recommended pin to pap along with x-hole locations etc......the first thing the bowler says is "it doesn't look like the drill sheet". Proshops always love that. Now the proshop is wrong and blamed for the drilling.
The drill sheet pic is a generalization based off of averages and where the pin would be for most. They dual angle numbers given are more exact and more likely to differ slightly from the pictures given.
The ball you are drilling is symmetric. As Phil said use the symmetric core motion hole layout just like your Ridiculous pearl etc.
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/images/9/9c/MOtion_Hole_Symmetrical_Instructions.pdf
http://radicalbowling.com/uploads/downloads/Radical_Drilling_Instructions-Ridiculous_Symmetric.pdf
http://radicalbowling.com/uploads/downloads/Radical_Drilling_Instructions_-_Jackpot.pdf
The blueprint reference is to the fact that the ball is symmetric, and it is the layouts and weight hole locations making it more asymmetric or less asymmetric after drilling. You are over thinking the marketing aspect of what is written above about the core being asymmetric and symmetric along with what is in the drill sheet. This same thing can be done with several different balls and anyone with access to the blueprint software could show examples. No doubt many will have similar questions when looking at the marketing material along with the drill sheet when the ball is released.
No bashing, just your perception and being defensive. Looks like a fun ball, and the color reminds me of the Brutal Nightmare which is always a plus.
-
Have you even looked at the drilling sheet? Are you saying Mo doesn't know what he's talking about? (And Phil as well?) Yes, I could drill it the same way I have drilled other symmetric balls with motion hole. That wasn't the question here. The question is directed solely towards the asymmetric layout D on the drilling sheet. How hard is that to understand?
Blueprint has no business in this discussion if it only deals with ebonite balls, especially when it cannot tell me where to place the motion hole based on layout D on the drill sheet.
Phil did answer me and say that I can drill it the same as my Ridiculous Pearl. That is perfectly fine. However, there has to be a reason that layout D exists. And I'm interested in trying it for myself. So again, I wanted to know if the motion hole placement remains at 10" from the pin with that layout. Simple question.
Why does everything have to turn into a debate and/or company bashing? Just stay out of the discussion if it does not suit your beliefs - unless the topic actually calls for a debate.
Jaz
Put the hole at 10 inch, we have tested all the drill patterns, the cylindrical core body allows for us to use the motion hole as presented on our symmetrical drill sheet. It will work.
thanks for the support.
-
Part of the uniqueness of the Shapeshifter core is the fact that there are several areas between the sprockets in the band at the top of the core that are filled with lighter core material. there isn't a software program available that will tell you the ending results of the drilled ball without knowing the densities of inner core the outer core and the mass removed once you hit the sprocket or the area between the sprockets. This is what makes this core so unique. The programs can not tell you if you are hitting the core in the correct place and hitting or missing the scoop, we do that for you.
Regarding core shapes and speculation as to what it looks like and from which company, look at my history on core designs and tell me how many of my designs have been copied. The shapeshifter is not a copy it is a totally new technology, and the drill sheets are very special because we actually make sure the holes are hitting the proper density in order to achieve the desired core type, either symmetrical or asymmetrical.
We led with the scoop and now we have advanced it even further.
-
Phil, I'm looking seriously at the Fix. I'd be interested in setting the ball up with one of the pin-up Asymmetric layouts (most likely layout C in drilling instructions).
Can a short pin (2 inches) be effectively used for that pin-up layout? There is one in the shop that's immediately available, but I'll order something longer if needed for best results. Thanks.
-
Just New words for Old technology.........So the sheep will follow
-
Wow. Thank you for adding to the thread.
-
I had put this thread behind me a month ago since there was no point going in circles, but since it was bumped up again...
I do NOT just look at pictures on the layout sheets and think that is where the pin HAS to be. I'm more knowledgeable than that. The first question I had was about the motion hole placement distance, which was answered by Phil (thank you).
Second question had to do with the usage of dual angle on the fix for motion hole. It is NOT used for normal motion hole layouts. The PAP is only used to determine where to place the pin, either above the ring or beside. Can you place it elsewhere? Of course you can! And I have. But that is beyond the point. I just wondered why it was being laid out differently here. No pictures swaying my thoughts - simply layout method.
I did later realize that 3 asymmetric layouts are the same for this ball. C is no hole. D is motion hole. E is double thumb. Assuming I'm remembering correctly without looking. So no, not the same as the normal motion hole layout. And yes, the normal motion hole layout could be used. But again, not the point.
Anyway, I participated in the facebook session with Mo, and he answered my questions. I asked him about blueprint and he said you can't duplicate this in blueprint and no other ball allows for as great of difference in ball motion than the fix. He said to email him directly if you question him and he will provide you with all the evidence. If you continue to believe it is marketing, then that is your choice.
I'm not even sure I'm buying the ball anymore. But I definitely put more trust in what Mo says over what some random people on these boards say.
-
If we were to look at the Fix with the perspective of the customer and manufacturer, you get something different than other balls and something different than what we have seen recently.
Customer gets a ball that can be versatile and be a version of both asymmetrical and symmetrical, as long as you want a pin down symmetrical and a pin up asymmetrical (or better represented as VAL). But to be honest, if you are in the market for an asymmetrical ball, there are plenty of options and if you are in the market for a symmetrical ball there are also plenty of options (even from Radical). Also, these options give you the full VAL range to play with where as the Fix does not to some degree.
The manufacturer gets a single ball that can fill two positions in its arsenal. This benefits the manufacturer by eliminating the need for two balls, two manufacturing runs, two design developments and everything else that comes with a second ball. This is cheaper for Radical and makes a ton of sense, much like when shoe companies went to replaceable soles on the non-sliding shoe making the manufacturing of one base shoe possible instead of left and right.
I give Radical credit in pushing the envelop of bowling ball design. And even though you can produce symmetrical and asymmetrical core numbers from this one ball, this might also make hitting the desired numbers more difficult since the range of intermediate differential across the VAL range is larger.