win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Reduce side weight or not?  (Read 1545 times)

agroves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4939
Reduce side weight or not?
« on: February 19, 2008, 10:04:06 PM »
I got to toss a few shots with my Neptune.  I think I'd like to reduce the continuation some, as it just doesn't stop.  I believe the current static side weight is 1/4 oz positive.  I was thinking of dropping that down to 1/2 neg to calm down the backend reaction.  

Current layout is 6" pin to pap, shiny as heck.

Thoughts?
--------------------
Andrew

 

Powermachine-

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
Re: Reduce side weight or not?
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2008, 06:07:03 AM »
more cowbell
--------------------
yes i sandbag im left handed.
Typical house bowler
Avg-210
lineup:
Horizon Pearl
Quantum Le

2EZ

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
Re: Reduce side weight or not?
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2008, 09:21:23 AM »
I have almost the same problem with my Neptune. With the initial drill of 6" pin - to - pap I had decent movement, as long the back ends were fairly clean. However, any appreciable amount of carry down and I had nothing. Plugged and redrilled stacked leverage - currently 1 ounce side weight(no balance hole yet) and the thing runs across the end of the lane like someone kicked it. I left three - nine pins last week (first week with new layout). Planning on adding a balance hole to take side weight to zero. If this doesn't give the reaction I need, I plan next to add some surface to the cover to mellow it out(mine is as "shiney as heck" also).
Hoping to get this done before bowling tomorrow night, if I can get down to my driller by then. I'll reply with results when I have them.

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24523
Re: Reduce side weight or not?
« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2008, 11:53:26 AM »
quote:
I got to toss a few shots with my Neptune.  I think I'd like to reduce the continuation some, as it just doesn't stop.  I believe the current static side weight is 1/4 oz positive.  I was thinking of dropping that down to 1/2 neg to calm down the backend reaction.  

Current layout is 6" pin to pap, shiny as heck.

Thoughts?
--------------------
Andrew


Unless the pattern on which you "tossed a few shots" is the permanent and only pattern on which you will use the Neptune, I'd suggest trying it a couple of more times before modifying it.  

Then I'd suggest taking a small amount of the shine you have on it off, rather than drilling holes in it. It's easier to modify the cover than to refill holes if they don't help; you can always drill a hole.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Unofficial Ballreviews.com FAQ
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

2EZ

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
Re: Reduce side weight or not?
« Reply #4 on: February 29, 2008, 09:27:34 AM »
Agroves,
I finally got the positive weights taken out, with excellent results. The ball had just under an ounce side and finger weight. I added a balance hole on pap to bring side weight to zero, and drilled the fingers down to zero also. Threw it last night for the first time on my fried second shift league; 276 (one "oops" in the sixth), 235 (lanes transitioned and I did not move far or fast enough), 193 (still not keeping up with transition: eight strikes and four splits), 704. This is huge on this shot. The ball no longer jumped across the back end as violently as before, but reacted controllably, with a nice smooth transition off the dry into a nice arc into the pocket. Although the strong backend reaction you described was the same I was seeing before removing the positive static weights, the only other difference between your Neptune and mine is probably pin and cg location. I originally had the pin at 6", cg at 4", with the reaction described earlier. Now the ball is set up 4 x 4, stacked, with pin just slightly above and slightly to the right of ring finger. This is a stronger drill than yours, so I can't be sure you will see the same results I did by adding a balance hole. But, after last night, I would still have to recommend it, taking the static weights to zero. Also, I did not have to ad surface to the cover to achieve these results.

CoachJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Reduce side weight or not?
« Reply #5 on: February 29, 2008, 09:49:58 AM »
I agree with Charlest the ball is still hooking on the back end because the ball is too weak, you need to dull the cover to make it grab and lose more side rotation, Start with 1000 or 2000 abralon and if it still drives through the pins too much try going to 500 or 1000 abralon, if it dies go to 4000 abralon.

agroves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4939
Re: Reduce side weight or not?
« Reply #6 on: February 29, 2008, 10:19:13 PM »
I gave it to my father in law....  Doesn't fit me.
--------------------
Andrew