BallReviews
Equipment Boards => Storm => Topic started by: TamerBowling on May 22, 2014, 10:18:38 PM
-
In case it gets buried in the long debate about releases, I've posted these vids separately to discuss ball reaction.
http://tamerbowling.com/index.php/new-storm-equipment-optimus-hy-road-solid/
We tested the Optimus and Hy Road on a heavier volume THS and Scorpion.
The Optimus rolls so much like the Marvel Pearl. I would imagine we are going to see lots of pros throwing this ball. I'm not much for all those swirly colors but if you can manage to get past that or really like it, there it is. I personally prefer the darker colors of the Marvel Pearl. Nevertheless, low RG core that helps the ball get into a roll as well as a fairly aggressive coverstock makes this a controllable but strong ball. The R2X is smoother than the previous generation reactor covers since it seems to have a bit more surface friction.
With the Hy Road Solid, we compared it to the original Hy Road which everyone seems to still have. It's exactly as you would expect. Recognizable reaction that reads the midlane a little better which smoothes out the backend and makes it very continuous and controlled, but less boomy.
Our tester is Jeremy Overdier of Pure It Pro Shop in Lebanon PA. He's about 400 revs and averages around 225.
Let me know what you think.
-
In case it gets buried in the long debate about releases, I've posted these vids separately to discuss ball reaction.
http://tamerbowling.com/index.php/new-storm-equipment-optimus-hy-road-solid/
We tested the Optimus and Hy Road on a heavier volume THS and Scorpion.
The Optimus rolls so much like the Marvel Pearl. I would imagine we are going to see lots of pros throwing this ball. I'm not much for all those swirly colors but if you can manage to get past that or really like it, there it is. I personally prefer the darker colors of the Marvel Pearl. Nevertheless, low RG core that helps the ball get into a roll as well as a fairly aggressive coverstock makes this a controllable but strong ball. The R2X is smoother than the previous generation reactor covers since it seems to have a bit more surface friction.
With the Hy Road Solid, we compared it to the original Hy Road which everyone seems to still have. It's exactly as you would expect. Recognizable reaction that reads the midlane a little better which smoothes out the backend and makes it very continuous and controlled, but less boomy.
Our tester is Jeremy Overdier of Pure It Pro Shop in Lebanon PA. He's about 400 revs and averages around 225.
Let me know what you think.
This was probably the first time I didn't gain anything from your videos, first, those layouts are not on par with what your testers usually use, hated the layouts used. Totally vain, but seeing those clown yellow thumb slugs annoyed me as all. Overall, I was disappointed in the videos. Sorry.
-
I don't like being super critical, especially since I love your other reviews, but I'm kind of on the same page with northface. I'm sure those layouts make those balls usable in certain situations, but for showing them off on a video . . It looks like the house pattern had a lot to do with the nearly horrific reaction for both balls, they acted quite a bit better on the Scorpion, but those layouts definitely weren't helping anything. Honestly with as bad as the balls look on that house pattern, if I was the average consumer, I may not have made it to the Scorpion footage on the back half of the video. I know you've already posted the videos, but if I were you, I may go back and reshoot the house pattern part. It's a great production as always, well shot, well edited, great video quality, but I think we can all agree that both balls look absolutely horrific on that house pattern.
-
On a 12:1 ratio, play the friction, not the soup!
-
That was another comment I forgot to make. With the balls doing virtually nothing in terms of hook, I'm not sure why you'd play 4th arrow. I'm betting it has to do with angles for the video camera, but evenso, just another contributing factor to the unimpressive reaction.
On a 12:1 ratio, play the friction, not the soup!
-
The videos were helpful for me. I saw nothing wrong with the layouts chosen. Granted, you could have laid the balls out to skid flip. I guess the tester good have stood on top of the dry and seemingly covered more boards flinging it at a much higher speed with increased axis rotation. Nothing wrong with this.
I would rather see the balls rolled within the testers comfort zone showing the reaction from skid to hook to roll. I purchased a Marvel Pearl and laid it out similarly to use when I wanted to move in and keep the shot in front of me. Worked out well until it cracked. I see the Optimus filling the same slot.
-
I'm really not sure what all the beefing is about. The vids helped me similarly with a reaction I had been trying to get from my T-Road solid. I saw the surface-play versus the pearlized movement. Not a horrible reaction at all, just different!
In the end, it's all about strikes and carry, not how you did it. The testers played the middle of the lane primarily which is similar to how I play. I am not a shoot down 10 kind of guy all the time; nor am I a deep inside line kind of guy, and I never even noticed the thumb slugs. (Really??)
These vids gave me a good insight into the dynamics of each of these balls. Overall, it was good for me.
-
I want to clarify my post. I am not at all knocking anything on the video. I just wish as a staffer, he would have gave these balls a little more bounce. The carry would have improved and the audience would have appreciated the "motion" more. The hits were flat because of the volume and length of the pattern. The balls really came alive on Scorpion when it read friction. Great videos, just some friendly comments. Keep it up!!!
-
I felt the same way . .
Of course all the shots knocked the pins down, it was edited that way, but it was obvious he was getting pretty bad reaction. Yeah it's about strikes and carry, but I'd like to see the unedited video. You get more carry and more strikes when you play the lanes the right way, I really didn't like the look he had with either ball. Again, sometimes you find yourself in that situation where the ball WILL react like it does in the video, but for the vast majority of bowlers, who has that same look at their home center? Who is going to watch the footage on the house shot and say, "Wow, I need to get me one of those!" ?
The footage on the Scorpion was great, if that was the whole video it would have been great. I just don't see a lot of people getting much out of the stuff on the house shot . . some people will, but when you're showing something new off, you want to show it at its best.
I want to clarify my post. I am not at all knocking anything on the video. I just wish as a staffer, he would have gave these balls a little more bounce. The carry would have improved and the audience would have appreciated the "motion" more. The hits were flat because of the volume and length of the pattern. The balls really came alive on Scorpion when it read friction. Great videos, just some friendly comments. Keep it up!!!
-
I totally agree that the video would be more informative if the bad shots were not edited out. But, how often do you see that?
-
Lol never . . but that just follows my point of wanting to show the ball at its best. Of course it's not going to strike every time, and we all know that, but I can pretty well guarantee with that reaction and where he was playing that the videos took longer to film than most . .
I totally agree that the video would be more informative if the bad shots were not edited out. But, how often do you see that?
-
Thanks all for your comments.
As mentioned in the review, the house shot was not playing as it typically does. You play for what you have. For whatever reason, that pair on this night played this way. There was no friction to be had on the outside so Jeremy had a legitimate reason to play where he was. Now I realize that it may not look pretty to everybody but I figured some folks might want to see how these balls play when the condition is soupy. I'm sure there will be a bevy of videos demonstrating how these balls hook the whole lane. Well at least you now have something to show you how they look when it's not a 17:1 38 ft desert :-)
Don't get me wrong, I can understand why you might think the videos don't show off the prowess of the balls. However, that's also why I added the sport pattern. These balls can and do hook quite a bit. In fact, it's part of the reason why we played deeper at the arrows and down lane. From farther right, they hooked too much but the way the pattern was playing, outside was not coming back. In fact, you can see how well the Hy Road solid helped smooth out what was difficult playing pattern. Isn't that useful information?
In terms of the layout, not really sure there's much to justify. Layouts are designed for each bowler specifically and to match up to the typical condition they face. It just happened on this night, they may not have been a perfect matchup.
Regardless, I hope it has added some value to you all who might be considering these pieces. Like I said, there will be other videos from others eventually that show the balls hooking much more. If we get a chance, I will consider a reshoot of the house shot and add it to our video library. We do everything we can to make these useful to you, the bowlers who would consider buying these balls. I am not on Storm staff and I don't get paid to do this work. I just enjoy the game and hope tamerbowling.com continues to be a useful resource to bowlers.
-
Everyones reaction, form, release etc. Is different from the next....like signatures or snowflakes...
Gotta love the "professional pro shop guys" that know it all. How dare any of us play the lanes wrong, throw it wrong!
-
CAN'T I JUST LIKE A BALL BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY???????
-
Why yes, of course ;)
-
Everyones reaction, form, release etc. Is different from the next....like signatures or snowflakes...
Gotta love the "professional pro shop guys" that know it all. How dare any of us play the lanes wrong, throw it wrong!
How DARE!
-
Tamerbowling,
Thanks again for the video and the follow up explanation regarding ball reaction on that particular house shot. Do you mind sharing how much editing was done on the Optimus video. Or, stated differently, how hard was it to get the ball to face up, and what did the reaction look like playing up the track where there was no hook?
-
The videos were helpful for me. I saw nothing wrong with the layouts chosen. Granted, you could have laid the balls out to skid flip. I guess the tester good have stood on top of the dry and seemingly covered more boards flinging it at a much higher speed with increased axis rotation. Nothing wrong with this.
I would rather see the balls rolled within the testers comfort zone showing the reaction from skid to hook to roll. I purchased a Marvel Pearl and laid it out similarly to use when I wanted to move in and keep the shot in front of me. Worked out well until it cracked. I see the Optimus filling the same slot.
Except the ball never went through correct skid, hook, roll phase. It was skid, half roll, half back-up into the pocket.
-
Tamerbowling,
Thanks again for the video and the follow up explanation regarding ball reaction on that particular house shot. Do you mind sharing how much editing was done on the Optimus video. Or, stated differently, how hard was it to get the ball to face up, and what did the reaction look like playing up the track where there was no hook?
Sure, this was a trickier shot than usual. Playing up the track say 12 to 10 would go through the face. 12 to 8 and you will just touch the headpin. 12 to 6 and it's asking for a washout. So you had to use ~10 at the breakpoint but from deeper angles. It actually played a bit like Shark where there isn't tons of volume in the midlane so too direct and you face up. So you've got to open up your angles if you have a higher rev rate. The Optimus did have some trouble facing up nicely from the deeper line with the shiny surface on this slicker pattern but did carry well. It just had too much grip playing "up the boards" but not quite enough from deeper. However, once Jeremy played deep and kept the breakpoint in, he could carry pretty well.
The Hy Road Solid played better on this pattern as it did grip the midlane allowing it to face up to the pocket better.
Unless you roughed the surface up on the Optimus, this wouldn't be the ideal pattern for it. The shoot also took a little longer than expected as we weren't expecting the shot to play this way. Jeremy has a composite 230 average in this house but it still took us a little by surprise.
Hope that helps.
-
Instead of defending the balls reacting like wet ass don't put in your original post that the balls were tested "on a heavier volume THS" if the weren't.
-
So Tamer bowling decided to make these videos without being obligated to do so and then gets negatively criticized for it. I'm sure there will be a large number of videos for these two pieces that will be posted soon showing a different reaction. Tamer shouldn't be criticize and questioned for posting a review and video that they didn't have to post. I appreciate the work they did and the time spent to take all of the necessary steps to produce and post these two videos as well as all of the videos they've produced in the past. If someone isn't pleased with the video that was posted, then by all means post one of your own. I could see it if a person was paying them personally to make a video and decided to criticize them because they weren't pleased, but that's not the case. I normally don't speak out much, but at some point a person/group wants to be able to do something and not be negatively criticized, especially when they did it on their own merit. Thanks again Tamer bowling for taking the time to produce and post these videos.
-
+1
-
Tamer is a website that claims to be "the #1 bowling ball review site on earth" and they are posting links to their site on another ball review site. There is no need to defend them.
-
The Optimus looked better on the Scorpion then did on the THS, which most people bowl on.
-
Thanks all for your comments. We do what we can. If you get something out of it, great. If not, then there will be plenty of other videos out there for your perusal.
People have asked questions about the ball reaction and I've tried to answer the best I could. We write reviews for the simple reason that the video doesn't ever tell the whole story, even if you simply love the 5 shots that were edited by whomever. We show flush shots, soft shots, corner pins, etc. on purpose so you can see what you get. The fact that the ball carried with the lighter shots that didn't quite turn over should also tell you something.
If you have any other questions about the ball reaction, please feel free to ask.
Sport patterns 42 or less typically do show a more aggressive backend so really not very surprising if you think about it.
-
So Tamer bowling decided to make these videos without being obligated to do so and then gets negatively criticized for it. I'm sure there will be a large number of videos for these two pieces that will be posted soon showing a different reaction. Tamer shouldn't be criticize and questioned for posting a review and video that they didn't have to post. I appreciate the work they did and the time spent to take all of the necessary steps to produce and post these two videos as well as all of the videos they've produced in the past. If someone isn't pleased with the video that was posted, then by all means post one of your own. I could see it if a person was paying them personally to make a video and decided to criticize them because they weren't pleased, but that's not the case. I normally don't speak out much, but at some point a person/group wants to be able to do something and not be negatively criticized, especially when they did it on their own merit. Thanks again Tamer bowling for taking the time to produce and post these videos.
He solicited our "criticism". I do not recall anyone slandering his website, reviews, etc. I apologize that watching a ball back up practically all the way down the lane and barely get the 5 pin out is a suitable review for you, but obviously, for many of us, it is not.
-
I liked the videos, they were different and that's a good thing. I'll check out the vids from bowlingball.com, Bowlers Deals and the Japanese sites. Just want to see the ball for it's shelf appeal, see how it rolls and what kind of bowlers are throwing it and on what conditions are used. Keep up the good work, Tamer!
-
OK, for those who were looking for a review of the Optimus and Hy Road on medium THS, here you go.
The first video is on a heavier THS and Scorpion.
The second video is on medium THS (different house).
This should give you an idea of how these balls would react on various conditions. What you see is what you get in terms of ball reaction.
All videos and review are here:
http://tamerbowling.com/index.php/new-storm-equipment-optimus-hy-road-solid/
Medium THS review
-
Everybody needs to be objective here. When marketing or reviewing a product, you have a responsibility to be as accurate as possible, that's the whole point. You want to give a good representation of the product as it will appear to the largest group of consumers. Anyone who creates a production like this for public viewing should be open to criticism, and TamerBowling has handled it exceptionally well. Honestly, they have put out tons of review videos, and these two were the ONLY ones that weren't on par with the rest, and just because of the first halves of both videos.
As for the "professional pro shop guys" who know everything, and how dare anyone play the lanes wrong or throw it wrong . . it's kind of their job to help people do it right or to point out when it's not done right, because you know if someone spends 250 bucks on a ball and it "sucks," you know exactly who is going to get blamed, even if they're playing the lanes wrong and throwing it wrong . .
Then there's the other crowd who wants to give everybody a medal or trophy no matter what. I make my own videos and still field plenty of criticism, but even if one of the complainers is dead wrong, I'M the one who put the video out there, I'M the one who opened myself up for it. My videos, my responsibility, it comes with the territory. That's like saying we shouldn't criticize an athlete for a bad performance. Yeah there are all kinds of excuses you could use, but at the same time, it's part of what they signed up for. You can't praise someone for doing good and keep your mouth shut when they do bad . .
The bottom line was that the original videos misrepresented the reaction that the vast majority of the consumers will see out of those two balls. It's still incredibly helpful to see how those balls will react in unfavorable conditions, not many videos show that, but it's also a great illustration of why being able to read ball reaction, play the lanes right and picking the right equipment is so important. Otherwise you get balls that back up all the way to the pocket . .
Either way, they have put out a new video which shows the balls in a much better light. Yeah people will say "well yeah they're gonna look good if you set it up like that," but isn't that the point? If they design a ball for medium-heavy oil, shouldn't you show it and use it on the condition it was designed for? Or is that too much logic and reasoning for this crowd? The new video shows the balls as they were designed to react, plus we have the other videos that show you how they fare on other conditions. And as always, they are all great productions.
-
I was just wondering what balls to you think would work best on the conditions they were throwing on in the first video? I would have thought these would have been two of the better choices from Storm for conditions like those or is it mainly the ball setup and line that has everyone talking?
-
Agreed. Our sport isn't what it used to be or what it should be, and I just don't want the folks doing these videos to get discouraged. They are a positive thing, and we need all the positives we can get.
-
Ball choices for that first shot would have been much heavier oil balls. Think Sync. Polished balls (Optimus) generally don't work well on heavy oil conditions with no backend reaction. Hyroad Solid just doesn't have enough teeth. Plus that angle inside isn't helping things.
I was just wondering what balls to you think would work best on the conditions they were throwing on in the first video? I would have thought these would have been two of the better choices from Storm for conditions like those or is it mainly the ball setup and line that has everyone talking?
-
Yes but it's only a positive if it's accurate . . we have several "youth coaches" around here, and we'd be MUCH better off if they would quit and/or leave. Normally you'd say you want all the help with that you can get, but these people are terrible, actually a detriment.
Agreed. Our sport isn't what it used to be or what it should be, and I just don't want the folks doing these videos to get discouraged. They are a positive thing, and we need all the positives we can get.
-
Ball choices for that first shot would have been much heavier oil balls. Think Sync. Polished balls (Optimus) generally don't work well on heavy oil conditions with no backend reaction. Hyroad Solid just doesn't have enough teeth. Plus that angle inside isn't helping things.
Thanks for the answer Gizmo I guess the Hyroad Solid isn't quite as strong as I expected.
I was just wondering what balls to you think would work best on the conditions they were throwing on in the first video? I would have thought these would have been two of the better choices from Storm for conditions like those or is it mainly the ball setup and line that has everyone talking?
-
Tamerbowling has done a very good job with its videos. I got more out of the first set of videos than I did out of the last set.
What was the last "new release" that a legit 220 plus bowler couldn't make hook the lane and strike on a walled up shot.
I personally prefer seeing how the balls react on more difficult conditions, whether they be wet, dry or carry down.
I hope that in the future Tamerbowling presents balls, as it did in this case, based on its objective assessment of how the balls performed when put to the test. I don't care to see how a ball rolls under perfect conditions on a walled up house shot. I can figure that out for myself.
-
Well yes I understand that, but you also have to remember the general consumer isn't as learned or understanding . . You may show other things too, but you have to show the ball on the condition it was intended for to give them the best idea how it's going to react. If you throw a ball on a condition it wasn't intended for, it's hard to gauge sometimes what it will really do.
I agree though, I can pretty well look at a ball and tell you what it's going to do without ever seeing it roll on a house shot. BUT there's reason to be used here too. If a ball doesn't work well on a condition it wasn't intended for, can you really hold that against it? Yeah some balls are more versatile than others, but there's gotta be some very clear cut comments to that effect to make sure people understand what they're watching.
Tamerbowling has done a very good job with its videos. I got more out of the first set of videos than I did out of the last set.
What was the last "new release" that a legit 220 plus bowler couldn't make hook the lane and strike on a walled up shot.
I personally prefer seeing how the balls react on more difficult conditions, whether they be wet, dry or carry down.
I hope that in the future Tamerbowling presents balls, as it did in this case, based on its objective assessment of how the balls performed when put to the test. I don't care to see how a ball rolls under perfect conditions on a walled up house shot. I can figure that out for myself.
-
Gizmo,
I am not sure how you decide what condition the two balls were intended for, or whether the conditions depicted meet the bill. I say the conditions were within the range of intended use. I guess you are saying they were not.
Philosophically, I guess the question is whether Tamerrbowling's intent is to sell balls to the general consumer, or to show true ball reaction.
-
Good thing I don't actually sell equipment ;)
Seriously though, I think you will now have the opportunity to see these balls on 3 different conditions.
Medium THS 41ft
Heavy THS 41ft
Sport (Scorpion - old 41 ft)
Just like BTM would test the ball on each pattern and tell you which one is the preferred pattern, that's what we tried to do. Since I am not selling magazines or subscriptions or anything, I can't quite afford to test every ball we get on 3 different patterns. That simply won't be the norm.
Nevertheless, in this case here's my take:
Optimus - (4 of 10) On the heavier pattern, it wasn't the ideal ball in the OOB finish. I didn't mess around with the surface to see if it would better handle it. We simply found the best line for the ball in its OOB configuration. And to be fair, it carried well. I wouldn't say it backed up like some have pleasantly described but it didn't have the teeth to make it up the hill with more strength.
On the Medium THS (8.5 of 10), it was basically at home. Decent amount of forgiveness and the right match up of strength of ball and lane condition.
On the Sport (7 of 10), it seemed to match up fairly well, but would probably react a touch better if the surface was taken down a bit on a fresh shot. In the OOB, a bit broken down would be a better match up.
Hy Road Solid - On the heavier pattern, it was a decent match. Maybe a 7.5 out of 10. It had way more teeth than the Optimus. However, it was too much from more direct lines and not quite as much as you would like from inside. Still a decent match up as that rolly midlane gave a nice move. Only a few balls would have enough teeth AND angularity to get around the corner from inside on this pattern and you're probably looking at a Hyper Cell or something of that nature.
On the Medium pattern (6 of 10). In OOB, it was simply too strong so read the midlane too early. It burned up too much energy to yield a strong backend if you got in a bit.
On the Sport pattern (8.5 of 10). It really shined on this pattern. Had plenty of strength to get even deeper than the Optimus and had a strong backend move with the squeaky clean backends of the sport pattern.
All of this is to say you have to consider our tester and his tilt, rotation, rev rate as well. You also have to consider surface changes as an option.
There's simply no way for us to test every "configuration" possible. But we add information in the written reviews to help provide as much information as possible to supplement the videos.
Hope that helps.
-
You go by what the manufacturer says . . where it says "medium-heavy oil" or "medium oil." Now those are pretty nebulous terms, but judging by the ball reaction, it was definitely too wet for the Optimus, a bit too wet for the Hyroad.
Showing true ball reaction is great, but you wouldn't try to sell a set of racing slicks to somebody by showing them how they perform in snow and rain, or I would say the customer wouldn't care, because if they wanted something that gave them traction in snow and rain, they wouldn't be looking at racing slicks in the first place. Snow tires are made for snow, so showing how they work in snow would make sense, wouldn't it?
So following the same logic, I don't care how the Optimus reacts in a flood, because I'd throw one shot, put it back in the bag, and pull out something designed for those conditions, like a Sync.
Gizmo,
I am not sure how you decide what condition the two balls were intended for, or whether the conditions depicted meet the bill. I say the conditions were within the range of intended use. I guess you are saying they were not.
Philosophically, I guess the question is whether Tamerrbowling's intent is to sell balls to the general consumer, or to show true ball reaction.
-
I'm curious, because you have talked about the Venom Shock being stronger than advertised. Shouldn't we only be describing how it reacts on the condition it was 'designed' for?
I understand that a ball being stronger than advertised isn't a bad thing, but it's a little bit hypocritical in my opinion.
Regardless, I'm anxious to see some higher rev/power players on upcoming videos for these two balls.
You go by what the manufacturer says . . where it says "medium-heavy oil" or "medium oil." Now those are pretty nebulous terms, but judging by the ball reaction, it was definitely too wet for the Optimus, a bit too wet for the Hyroad.
Showing true ball reaction is great, but you wouldn't try to sell a set of racing slicks to somebody by showing them how they perform in snow and rain, or I would say the customer wouldn't care, because if they wanted something that gave them traction in snow and rain, they wouldn't be looking at racing slicks in the first place. Snow tires are made for snow, so showing how they work in snow would make sense, wouldn't it?
So following the same logic, I don't care how the Optimus reacts in a flood, because I'd throw one shot, put it back in the bag, and pull out something designed for those conditions, like a Sync.
Gizmo,
I am not sure how you decide what condition the two balls were intended for, or whether the conditions depicted meet the bill. I say the conditions were within the range of intended use. I guess you are saying they were not.
Philosophically, I guess the question is whether Tamerrbowling's intent is to sell balls to the general consumer, or to show true ball reaction.
-
Some good stuff here. While I understand 3 patterns per ball won't be the norm, this is still a sweet set of vids. I love the two different THS's.
How absolutely similar to the Marvel Pearl is this ball? All things identical, I want to say the Optimus would get an extra few inches length going down the lane.
-
Yeah the Optimus is a bit longer and sharper.
Some good stuff here. While I understand 3 patterns per ball won't be the norm, this is still a sweet set of vids. I love the two different THS's.
How absolutely similar to the Marvel Pearl is this ball? All things identical, I want to say the Optimus would get an extra few inches length going down the lane.
-
How is it hypocritical? That's exactly what I was saying, it was stronger than advertised, hence it's "too strong" for the condition they say it was designed for. But again, in the quote, I say those are rather nebulous terms, and then I go on to say that then judging by ball reaction, the conditions were in actuality too wet for both balls. I was responding to him saying he wasn't sure how you determine what conditions a ball was designed for. That's determined by how the manufacturer labels it. Again, the labels are rather nebulous, but if the manufacturer says it's for medium oil, then you should test it on medium oil. If you get on medium oil and find out it's too strong, like the Venom Shock, you move on to find that ball's sweet spot. The Shock is more of a medium to heavy ball. I would then show it in action where it looks the best and make the note and identify it as such. That's why I've said several times that it IS stronger than advertised, or at least it's on the strong side of how it is advertised.
However, I still would not care how the Shock reacts on a flood, because it wasn't designed for that and I would never try to make it work, there is better equipment for that. Being a little stronger or a little weaker than intended is ok, because again, nebulous terms. Common sense DOES say that just because a ball is designed for one condition doesn't mean it won't work on another, I understand that, but just because you can beat in a nail with a wrench doesn't mean a hammer wouldn't do the job better.
I'm curious, because you have talked about the Venom Shock being stronger than advertised. Shouldn't we only be describing how it reacts on the condition it was 'designed' for?
I understand that a ball being stronger than advertised isn't a bad thing, but it's a little bit hypocritical in my opinion.
Regardless, I'm anxious to see some higher rev/power players on upcoming videos for these two balls.
You go by what the manufacturer says . . where it says "medium-heavy oil" or "medium oil." Now those are pretty nebulous terms, but judging by the ball reaction, it was definitely too wet for the Optimus, a bit too wet for the Hyroad.
Showing true ball reaction is great, but you wouldn't try to sell a set of racing slicks to somebody by showing them how they perform in snow and rain, or I would say the customer wouldn't care, because if they wanted something that gave them traction in snow and rain, they wouldn't be looking at racing slicks in the first place. Snow tires are made for snow, so showing how they work in snow would make sense, wouldn't it?
So following the same logic, I don't care how the Optimus reacts in a flood, because I'd throw one shot, put it back in the bag, and pull out something designed for those conditions, like a Sync.
Gizmo,
I am not sure how you decide what condition the two balls were intended for, or whether the conditions depicted meet the bill. I say the conditions were within the range of intended use. I guess you are saying they were not.
Philosophically, I guess the question is whether Tamerrbowling's intent is to sell balls to the general consumer, or to show true ball reaction.
-
Tamerbowling,
Thanks for the objective insight, the videos, and the additional responses.
CC
-
My pleasure.