BallReviews
Equipment Boards => Visionary => Topic started by: batbowler on January 28, 2013, 10:55:51 AM
-
Has anybody had a chance to roll the new Warlock XV? I never got a chance to roll the blue Warlock, but had the orange Warlock! Thanks, Bruce
-
Not released yet, should be out early Feb.
-
I figured they would get you or some of the others a ball to test and make vids with!!
-
should have them soon and when i do Vid will be up quickly
-
Any staffers got the new Warlock XV ? Any concrete date for the public release date ? I'm getting a new ball for heavy oil and want to support Visionary. Thanks
-
No concrete date. Either late this week or sometime next.
-
I am assuming that they have "tweaked" the original Warlock core, since bowlingballreviews(via the way back machine) & also bowlingball vault list the differential as .063 which exceeds the new usbc limits. Tha'ts assuming that the 2 websites are correct in that info.
Brad
-
I am assuming that they have "tweaked" the original Warlock core, since bowlingballreviews(via the way back machine) & also bowlingball vault list the differential as .063 which exceeds the new usbc limits. Tha'ts assuming that the 2 websites are correct in that info.
Brad
I couldn't find it on those 2 websites. Which Warlock core has the differential listed as .063?
Thanks.
-
I am assuming that they have "tweaked" the original Warlock core, since bowlingballreviews(via the way back machine) & also bowlingball vault list the differential as .063 which exceeds the new usbc limits. Tha'ts assuming that the 2 websites are correct in that info.
Brad
I couldn't find it on those 2 websites. Which Warlock core has the differential listed as .063?
Thanks.
The Warlock DCs are .063; the Purple Pearl and the Pink DC Tour.
-
OOps....I got it confused with the sorcerer, was just looking at that ball recently. I stand corrected. The Sorcerer is listed as .063. My Mistake.
Brad
-
I thought so. The Warlocks I see are in the .043, .044, .045 range. Not weak, but controllable.
I think the coverstock strength is what made BTM rate the Warlcok XV in the heavy oil range.
-
I never owned the old Warlock. For those who have.Do the current Warlock XV numbers and core suggest a considerable up grade ? Any pictures of the new ball ?
-
I have one of the Orange Warlocks. The ball is no slouch on medium to medium dry, even today. In its day, this thing must have been a BEAST. I was very excited to read the review in Bowling This Month about the Warlock XV. I especially liked the part about it NOT checking up early as the shot dried up. I am so tired of being in the pocket, then suddenly through the nose with no warning.
-
I owned both the Blue (2) and the Orange. I am guessing there are no apples to apples comparison mainly in the cover of the old Blue and Orange (covers from 1997 to today....just ain't gonna compare) to this new Warlock. It's in name ONLY.
I never owned the old Warlock. For those who have. Do the current Warlock XV numbers and core suggest a considerable up grade ?
-
i have emailed Visionary and they emailed me the specs on the ball. Ball sounds like a winner. i suggest you email Jason or Betsy at Visionary for specs. I don't know if they want the specs out yet so i won't post them.
-
As of last week Betsy had asked not to release the specs yet so I will have to bite my tongue for a bit longer
-
It's NOT about the core or RG for the most part anyway. Who cares about the specs. It's about the cover and it will be stronger than anything old Warlock wise.
What VBP freaks should be happy about the new release is that it is NOT a z-spinner and a symmetrical house ball that more bowlers can use....that's what is the best out of any ball VBP has released since the Ogre line 07-08 and that's 4-5 years. Amazing to me that you can wait that long.
As of last week Betsy had asked not to release the specs yet so I will have to bite my tongue for a bit longer
-
Scotts
Don't know what has happened to you lately, but for me it is sometimes about the specs. As a former staffer of 3 different companies, I can tell you that when I want a certain reaction I look at the cover first and then the core specs to ensure the ball will shape as I want it to.
Yes, it is about the core. If Visionary was to put out the same Warlock as 15 years ago, the ball would not react well on today's conditioners. The ball would be a light medium to drier lane condition ball, not a good selling point. For the ball to be competitive, you need a stronger cover, but for everyone who loved the Warlock roll and hit, you still need the same engine! Remember when Columbia introduced the Cuda 2000...everyone thought it was the original Cuda/C core with the Holoflex cover. Come to find out the ball did NOT have the Ceramicore and it was a different core...that is why Columbia came out with the Cuda/C 2000 later to make everyone happy that complained. If Visionary was to come out with a new Warlock but have a completely different core, that would be misleading. So yes, I am very interested in the specs to see how close it is to the original as I am sure others are.
Your zeal for putting down Visionary in the last few months has been over the top. I do not know if you had a bad experience or what the deal is, but it seems every chance you get you place a little bit extra into the downgrading of them or turn the knife just a little bit more or push the knife deeper. So they made a Z line spin ball that for you was not good. I have seen some vids of people who have thrown the Mixed Breeds VERY well. Sorry they do not match for you, just like Storm and Roto do not match for me.
However, that does not mean you are always right and we are always wrong. You are entitled to your opinion but it is only that, one opinion.
3835
-
Well said! I am entitled to my opinion as well as you are entitled to yours. Anyone can put me on ignore. I am adding my opinion not any greater or worse than anyone else's.
However, that does not mean you are always right and we are always wrong. You are entitled to your opinion but it is only that, one opinion.
-
Sounds good to me. After respecting you and your opinion for so long, I guess the Ignore list is where you belong as a crabby old man. Sorry to see that happen to you.
3835
-
Sounds good to me. After respecting you and your opinion for so long, I guess the Ignore list is where you belong as a crabby old man. Sorry to see that happen to you.
3835
I was a big VBP person for years. I, too, have been disappointed with VBP the past few years for one reason. Its not that they released z-spin equipment. Its the fact that they did not promote the balls as such. So when people drilled the balls with their favorite layouts, they rolled like crap; almost a hook stop motion with little to no continuation. I have owned probably 10+ VBP balls in my career. My downfall came with the Crossover. I took my favorite layout and even kicked the cg a little farther right than I normally do and even a weight hole down. If I did not add alot of axis rotation, the ball was borderline hook/stop.
So after researching and talking with Jason, it was then that he said they were z-spinners and you had to lay the balls out in a particular way. When he said that it made total sense. However, it was not disclosed until after people had already bought the balls and drilled them. That kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Once the word got out about the z-spin and people drilled them accordingly, thats when people were seeing a much better ball roll.
So that is my gripe. For those that were pretty loyal to VBP feel like they got the raw end of the deal initially with the z-spinners. Hope that clarifies things.
-
Quote from: 3835 on Today at 07:03:18 AM
Sounds good to me. After respecting you and your opinion for so long, I guess the Ignore list is where you belong as a crabby old man. Sorry to see that happen to you.
3835
I was a big VBP person for years. I, too, have been disappointed with VBP the past few years for one reason. Its not that they released z-spin equipment. Its the fact that they did not promote the balls as such. So when people drilled the balls with their favorite layouts, they rolled like crap; almost a hook stop motion with little to no continuation. I have owned probably 10+ VBP balls in my career. My downfall came with the Crossover. I took my favorite layout and even kicked the cg a little farther right than I normally do and even a weight hole down. If I did not add alot of axis rotation, the ball was borderline hook/stop.
So after researching and talking with Jason, it was then that he said they were z-spinners and you had to lay the balls out in a particular way. When he said that it made total sense. However, it was not disclosed until after people had already bought the balls and drilled them. That kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Once the word got out about the z-spin and people drilled them accordingly, thats when people were seeing a much better ball roll.
So that is my gripe. For those that were pretty loyal to VBP feel like they got the raw end of the deal initially with the z-spinners. Hope that clarifies things.
Exactly my feelings and the same results that I got Steve. Glad I am not the only one to see this and report it. So, many only want to hear the good things and not the picture of the whole issue.
My main issue is that during the 4-5 year period of what I would term a usable ball for the majority on house conditions nothing was brought out. JMO but how do you go that long producing z-spinner after z-spinner that gave the hook-stop reaction and not bring out a usable house condition symmetrical ball?
-
Twohand,
I agree with you. In fact, I said the same thing. The difference between you and Scotts is you have not twisted the knife and come back and been disrespectful and sometimes degrading and mean with your comments about subjects totally unrelated.
It is all about delivery. Two hand, you delivered your comments without vile, unlike Scotts.
3835
-
I for one love my Mixed Breed Crossover, but I wasn't crazy about the New Breed line! I love my Gladiator pearl and use it when the Mixed Breed and The Classic are too strong! The Classic is an amazing piece and everybody that I let test it love it! The specs for the Warlock XV are in BTM and isn't really a secret not unless they change it from what they sent to BTM to test! Just my $.02, Bruce
-
I still am not sure that the core from the Blue & Orange Warlocks is not the same as the Sorcerer core. When looking at the lisitng for the blue warlock on bowlingballsreviews.com(via the wayback machine) and the listing for the sorcerer on bowling ball walult & bowlingballreviews, the picture the give of each core is the same picture------also in looking back at visionary's website from 2003 when they relased the Burgandy Gryphon, they said this about that ball
Starting with the original Warlock core (from the Blue and Orange Warlocks and the Sorcerer), the bottom was cut off to shorten the inner portion of the core. This lowers the differential slightly to help retain some length and energy for the back.
This leads me to believe that the core n the blue warlock was the same core in the Sorcerer with a 2.59 rg & .063 diff. The Blue warlock I had for a little bit of time ...I bought a nib "blem" I think ...it had a long pin & a bit of top weight & I was able to get a nice backend reaction out of it---but that was putting the pin waaay outside & up of my ring finger. At the tme I bought that ball just a couple of years ago, I didn't realize that the diff was that high.
Visionary mentions that the Gryphon diff was lowered slightly--the burgandy diff was .056 so that leads me to believe that the warlock core was .063 just like the sorcerer--I mean, visionary would know, they made both balls.
Brad
-
was given the ok so here you go.
Warlock XV
RG: 2.57â€
Total Diff: .038â€
Symetric Core
Color: Cream/Purple
Finish: 2000 Abralon
13-16# XV Core
10-12# Lite Wt Core
Coverstock XV Reactive
Core: Warlock
I do not have any Intel on the cover as of yet, once I know more ill post it.
ball \ core pic
(https://www.ballreviews.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi282.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fkk276%2FGratheil%2Fxvballandcorecopy2_zpsc4a38e5d.jpg&hash=8ebb9d9972aa9c9603c081d1b50a51d342ca9c82)
-
Quote from: 3835 on Today at 07:03:18 AM
Sounds good to me. After respecting you and your opinion for so long, I guess the Ignore list is where you belong as a crabby old man. Sorry to see that happen to you.
3835
I was a big VBP person for years. I, too, have been disappointed with VBP the past few years for one reason. Its not that they released z-spin equipment. Its the fact that they did not promote the balls as such. So when people drilled the balls with their favorite layouts, they rolled like crap; almost a hook stop motion with little to no continuation. I have owned probably 10+ VBP balls in my career. My downfall came with the Crossover. I took my favorite layout and even kicked the cg a little farther right than I normally do and even a weight hole down. If I did not add alot of axis rotation, the ball was borderline hook/stop.
So after researching and talking with Jason, it was then that he said they were z-spinners and you had to lay the balls out in a particular way. When he said that it made total sense. However, it was not disclosed until after people had already bought the balls and drilled them. That kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Once the word got out about the z-spin and people drilled them accordingly, thats when people were seeing a much better ball roll.
So that is my gripe. For those that were pretty loyal to VBP feel like they got the raw end of the deal initially with the z-spinners. Hope that clarifies things.
Exactly my feelings and the same results that I got Steve. Glad I am not the only one to see this and report it. So, many only want to hear the good things and not the picture of the whole issue.
My main issue is that during the 4-5 year period of what I would term a usable ball for the majority on house conditions nothing was brought out. JMO but how do you go that long producing z-spinner after z-spinner that gave the hook-stop reaction and not bring out a usable house condition symmetrical ball?
I am not sure why they have waited this long to produce a new symmetrical cored ball. I am excited to see how this puppy is going to roll though. Unfortunately, since it has been this long, and because a friend of mine is an Ebonite International Staffer, I have dabbled into that side and I must say I have been pretty impressed. I have drilled a Tornado and a Violent Eruption. So I really dont need anything else right now. All that aside, I am very curious to see the new Warlock.
-
Quote from: 3835 on Today at 07:03:18 AM
Sounds good to me. After respecting you and your opinion for so long, I guess the Ignore list is where you belong as a crabby old man. Sorry to see that happen to you.
3835
I was a big VBP person for years. I, too, have been disappointed with VBP the past few years for one reason. Its not that they released z-spin equipment. Its the fact that they did not promote the balls as such. So when people drilled the balls with their favorite layouts, they rolled like crap; almost a hook stop motion with little to no continuation. I have owned probably 10+ VBP balls in my career. My downfall came with the Crossover. I took my favorite layout and even kicked the cg a little farther right than I normally do and even a weight hole down. If I did not add alot of axis rotation, the ball was borderline hook/stop.
So after researching and talking with Jason, it was then that he said they were z-spinners and you had to lay the balls out in a particular way. When he said that it made total sense. However, it was not disclosed until after people had already bought the balls and drilled them. That kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Once the word got out about the z-spin and people drilled them accordingly, thats when people were seeing a much better ball roll.
So that is my gripe. For those that were pretty loyal to VBP feel like they got the raw end of the deal initially with the z-spinners. Hope that clarifies things.
Exactly my feelings and the same results that I got Steve. Glad I am not the only one to see this and report it. So, many only want to hear the good things and not the picture of the whole issue.
My main issue is that during the 4-5 year period of what I would term a usable ball for the majority on house conditions nothing was brought out. JMO but how do you go that long producing z-spinner after z-spinner that gave the hook-stop reaction and not bring out a usable house condition symmetrical ball?
I am not sure why they have waited this long to produce a new symmetrical cored ball. I am excited to see how this puppy is going to roll though. Unfortunately, since it has been this long, and because a friend of mine is an Ebonite International Staffer, I have dabbled into that side and I must say I have been pretty impressed. I have drilled a Tornado and a Violent Eruption. So I really dont need anything else right now. All that aside, I am very curious to see the new Warlock.
Dont forget the Classic, it might be listed as Asym but it is soooo small it really is a sym and should be drilled as one.
-
No 16lb, Matt C? On the core specs, you listed 13-15lb as having the XV Core? No mention of 16lb.
-
was just a cut n paste of what they had sent me, I am assuming that it will be in the 16# also. I will ask just to make sure
**edit** yes is a typo and ill fix the original
-
Against what would probably be better judgment, I just have to add my two cents worth to this whole discussion. As has been pointed out in this thread, everyone is entitled to their opinion. And I fully agree with that. But when you present your opinion as fact, it becomes an issue. People's opinions are just that, opinions. They are not necessarily true for everyone or in all cases. Indeed, they may only be true for that particular individual and even then only in some circumstances. Therefore, opinions should be clearly identified as opinions.
scotts33, I must say your posts confuse me. On the one hand, you are extremely critical of Visionary's recent core designs, to the point of calling their latest releases useless on typical house shots (although you don't give any basis for that opinion), then come out with a statement saying that core design and specs are basically meaningless and "it's all about the cover". What?!? If it's all about the cover, why are you so fixated on symmetrical versus asymmetrical core designs, z-spin, and all the rest? You have posted that you "call it like you see it", but how you see it appears, in my opinion, to be rather self-centered. Visionary hasn't come out with balls that you feel match your particular game, so they're "wrong", or the balls are "useless". Your posts almost give the impression that you feel that Visionary has "betrayed" you somehow. Visionary is like every other company in the fact that they are going to try to make what sells. They discontinued the blue/green Centaur because it wasn't "hook in a box" and people didn't buy enough of them to justify its continued manufacture. They recently discontinued their particle covers for the same reason (lack of sales). Based on some of your other posts, it appears that you are a Motiv devotee these days. This makes me think that your issues with Visionary may indeed be cover based. In my experience and in my opinion, Motiv appears to use covers that are more "control" based, don't react as strongly to friction, and bleed off energy more evenly. If your "typical house shot" is more of an extreme wet/dry, I can see where this would be an advantage. For other equipment, be it Visionary or someone else with a more aggressive cover, perhaps a layout with a bit larger drilling angle (more length) and, more importantly, a larger VAL angle (slower second transition) than you normally use would give a more consistent reaction closer to your comfort zone.
twohand834, I have to take exception with your statement that people would take Visionary equipment, drill their favorite layout, and the balls "rolled like crap". This would be your opinion, not an all encompassing fact. You said that it gave you a "borderline hook/stop". First of all, Chris Barnes has done pretty darn well with that type of reaction on lots of occasions. So, while it may not be what you were looking for, that doesn't make it "crap". You also said that you kicked the CG out more than usual (generally gives a more controlled back end reaction) and went with a low weight hole (generally increases total differential, increases flare, and increases the chances of "hook out", especially given your rev rate). It does not surprise me in the least that you had to add axis rotation. Personally, I have a Crossover drilled with a fairly standard 60 x 30 drill, and love the way it rolls. You posted that you were disappointed that Visionary didn't publicize that some of their core designs were z-spin. As has been pointed out numerous times, in all but the Mixed Breed the asymmetry is so mild as to be virtually irrelevant. You can generate substantially more asymmetry by the drilling of the holes. I'm not a core design expert by any means, but maybe that small amount of asymmetry makes more of a difference to someone with your rev rate. As you've said, your game is well outside the norm. But that means you have to know your game and how things affect it more than most. You can't expect ball companies to design and market products geared towards your game, or even really know how everything about their products will react in your hands. You are in that 1% of bowlers that, again, makes no commercial sense to design for.
Both of you have expressed disappointment that Visionary hasn't come out with more symmetrical core designs lately. First of all, the cores in the Gladiators, New Breeds, Spartan, and Classic are technically asymmetrical, but (according to Jason, others who have posted, and in my experience) the asymmetry is so mild it can basically be ignored. Secondly, what is wrong with the Ogres? A good, large volume, medium RG, medium differential symmetrical core with no wrap. They are available in a solid cover, an aggressive pearl, a "skiddy" pearl, and even a non-reactive urethane. What else are you looking for? Yes, they've been around for a while, but why is that a bad thing? Visionary as a company has repeatedly said that they are not going to come out with new balls just for the sake of having a new ball. They don't just take the same core, maybe tweak the cover some miniscule amount, change the color, and announce a new ball. Why should they be criticized for that?
Both of you have posted about "hook/stop" and lack of continuation. This has not been my experience. In fact, I recently finished second in a tournament due to leaving back-to-back-to-back solid eight pins (and I am left handed) in the middle of a potential seven bagger. A little less continuation might have been a good thing. I also looked at Matt C's videos. There doesn't appear to be any continuation problems for him or his brother. If you are experiencing continuation problems, it would be my opinion that there is a mismatch in surface/drilling pattern and lane surface/condition for your particular style. That is not the ball's (or ball company's) fault.
Well, this post went way longer than I intended or than it probably should have. I obviously have way too much time on my hands. I sincerely hope nobody felt that I was disrespecting anybody. That was certainly not my intent. I've read numerous posts from both scotts33 and twohands834, and both appear to be above average in their knowledge and certainly in their passion for the game. But, in my opinion, there is virtually no such thing as a "bad" ball these days. Given the right surface, drilling pattern, and lane condition, any ball can look outstanding. To present opinions or even personal experiences as facts that would apply to everyone, and use them to disparage a company is unfair.
-
tomf,
Do you understand what happens to a ball's reaction when you drill a z-spinner ball using the y-axis as the determinant of the PSA, (because the manufacturer didn ot inform the public that the ball's core was a z-spinner)?
When this happens 5+ times in a row, and every ball's reaction is not what you expected (even when you use one of the most experienced and knowledgeable drillers in the region), you tend to wonder what the manufacturer is not telling you and to wonder how much more of your bank account you're going to throw into the garbage.
Implying that scotts33 has an agenda because he has decided to go with Motiv balls when he had used Visionary almost exclusively for the past 10 years is so wrong as to be insulting to one who has proven his value to this community.
The same goes for twohand834, when you imply that its his opinion, when it is the facts as he has experienced it. Saying it's his opinion, makes it seem like he has no personal experience in the matter, when he HAD been as devoted a Visionary user as scotts33.
It seems like it's your opinion of their experience that is the OPINION in this case, more than anything else. I know them and I trust that the information they have related are the facts as they have experienced them. I trust that much more than I trust your opinion, no matter how many strikes in a row you have thrown.
I won't bandy "facts" with you. I would sincerely suggest you check the facts before you DECLARE them to be opinions of anyone, especially that of long-time respected members.
-
charlest,
Yes, I understand quite well what happens when you drill a z-spinner as if it were a y-spinner. And I never said that Visionary couldn't have done a better job in advertising the Mixed Breed as a z-spinner, although I also thought that the drilling instructions included with the ball did a pretty good job of explaining it. And, as I mentioned, if scotts33 was having a problem with over/under, I understand why Motiv may be a very good option. Lord knows there have been times when I could have used a more even reaction. And if someone wants to switch products for whatever reason, I certainly have no problem with that. And if someone is going to describe their experience with a particular product, drilling pattern, surface, or whatever, I'm all for it. That's what forums like this are all about.
What I do have an issue with is when someone implies or states that their experience must also be predictive of yours. That because a particular ball didn't match up well for their style on a particular lane condition, it won't match up well for you on your lane condition either. Or, worse yet, make sweeping generalizations about a product without giving any basis. If a particular ball didn't match up well for you, then just say that (and give some insight as to why). Don't use terms such as "stinkers" and "useless". This is especially true with people as technically knowledgeable as scotts33 and twohands834, who not only have the ability to accurately describe their experience but the knowledge to understand why they see what they are seeing. When I see a post from someone who says things like "I don't know what my axis is" or "I don't know how the ball is drilled", I tend to take what they say with a grain of salt. But there are some members who are obviously well experienced and highly knowledgeable, with a thorough understanding of the more technical aspects of the game that, frankly, I expect a lot from and tend to give greater weight to what they say (and, by the way charlest, you also fall into that category. I have learned quite a bit from many of your posts). I believe that these well respected members have a level of responsibility, and to make statements like "Everything they've come out with has been useless on a THS" or "People drilled it up and it rolled like crap" are, in my opinion, not up to their standards. They're better than that.
-
Since, my name keeps coming up here are two examples of past posts as to z-spinners and average to why I kept getting what I term questionable ball motion.
I can find more if need be. I didn't dig that hard and I also note that those that question my indifference didn't post on this forum at that time.
http://www.ballreviews.com/visionary/mohawk-core-t271020.0.html
http://www.ballreviews.com/visionary/gladiators-t277443.0.html
In my experience average ball performance started with the Gladiators, Spartan, Crossover and New Breeds. I had some decent scores but nothing that really blew your socks off. Think about all the $$$ over the dam spent on balls, drilling, plugging and re-drilling over these models.
You will also note that all of these balls nothing was much said nor were drilling instructions put in ball boxes by VBP. I believe that happened with the later Mixed Breed. Folks keep using the Mixed Breed as an example. I never drilled either one after al the average ball performance of the other z-spinners.
I find that most did not use VBP in early z-spinners and really don't know my experience. I have always had glowing reports before most of you ever used VBP or posted on this forum. Note amount of posts on VBP by myself and TwoHands834. The earlier lines are what I have always thought were VBP's best equipment then and now. Two Hands834 had very high scores with a Green Gargoyle at Natl's one year that I can remember.
Think about test staff members who if they paid the $50 annual fee never got anything in return other than z-spinners.
Another issue is VBP missing on-line presence. It's null and void now. For a few years nothing was reviewed by BTM or BJI.
Good luck on your use of VBP and back to the new Warlock which If I used VBP I might think would be a really good ball given the numbers.
I think Jason, John, Jim and Betsy are some of the best bowling industry folks I have ever known. Good luck to them and VBP.
-
charlest,
Yes, I understand quite well what happens when you drill a z-spinner as if it were a y-spinner. And I never said that Visionary couldn't have done a better job in advertising the Mixed Breed as a z-spinner,
You're either allowing your LOVE for Visionary to cloud the issue or you 're not understanding what I said. It's not a matter a "could have done a better job", it's a matter of not explaining exactly what they were producing via either a sin or ommission or commission.
A z-spinner cannot, I repeat, CANNOT, be drilled anywhere near the same as a "normal" or average Mass Bias or asymmetric cored ball or Y-spinner.
90 degrees out of phase is totally wrong. it;s the difference between early rolling and flippy response OR a flippy response or a barely making the turn type of response. These are potentially huge differences in ball reaction.
although I also thought that the drilling instructions included with the ball did a pretty good job of explaining it. And, as I mentioned, if scotts33 was having a problem with over/under, I understand why Motiv may be a very good option. Lord knows there have been times when I could have used a more even reaction. And if someone wants to switch products for whatever reason, I certainly have no problem with that. And if someone is going to describe their experience with a particular product, drilling pattern, surface, or whatever, I'm all for it. That's what forums like this are all about.
There are many instances over the past 6-18 months where both scott and twohand (steve) have described these differences. Many people may not have put all the pictures painted by them and other together into a formal picture of the situation.
What I do have an issue with is when someone implies or states that their experience must also be predictive of yours. That because a particular ball didn't match up well for their style on a particular lane condition, it won't match up well for you on your lane condition either. Or, worse yet, make sweeping generalizations about a product without giving any basis. If a particular ball didn't match up well for you, then just say that (and give some insight as to why). Don't use terms such as "stinkers" and "useless".
I know both of these bowlers and the context within which they "paint" their pictures of their balls and their bowling. I can guarantee they only use those words "useless" and "stinkers" once they have described the balls and their experienced results several times.
I am sure they only do this not to repeat over and over again their experiences. If you have not read all their previous posts, it is understandable how you can not understand where they are coming from.
This is especially true with people as technically knowledgeable as scotts33 and twohands834, who not only have the ability to accurately describe their experience but the knowledge to understand why they see what they are seeing. When I see a post from someone who says things like "I don't know what my axis is" or "I don't know how the ball is drilled", I tend to take what they say with a grain of salt. But there are some members who are obviously well experienced and highly knowledgeable, with a thorough understanding of the more technical aspects of the game that, frankly, I expect a lot from and tend to give greater weight to what they say (and, by the way charlest, you also fall into that category. I have learned quite a bit from many of your posts). I believe that these well respected members have a level of responsibility, and to make statements like "Everything they've come out with has been useless on a THS" or "People drilled it up and it rolled like crap" are, in my opinion, not up to their standards. They're better than that.
Thank you, I appreciate that.Like Scott and Steve, I try to make what I have learned available to all without repeating myself and being boring.
I am sorry that you might have missed some of the posts they have made about these concepts and concerns. I assure most sincerely that they would not post trivial nor undocumented facts as such as these. I can only surmise that they, like myself, don't want to to appear to harp on the same subject matter. It makes anyone appear to have an agenda. That is most assuredly NOT what any of the three of us have at ANY TIME and under any subject matter here on Ballreviews. I promise that, without fear of contradiction. Not one of us have any axe to grind nor agenda to promote except that of bowling itself.
-
Here is all I am going to say in response and then I will drop it. I have been associated with a pro shop here that is extremely knowledgeable when it comes to layouts and ball motion. This shop is also really close friends with Mo Pinel, Chuck Gardner, as well as a few professionals. He has also been on staff with Storm, Track, and now Ebonite International. That man has taught me so much about everything he has learned in the bowling industry. Having been to quite a few seminars and clinics being given my Mo and Chuck, I have also learned alot in regards to what to look for as a ball goes down the lane and making judgment calls based on what I see.
With that said.......in my previous post, I never said that the ball was crap. I said that it rolled like crap based on what I thought was a perfectly good layout based on my axis point. I have probably owned in the neighborhood of 15 VBP balls since they came into existence and that doesnt even include the Faball stuff I owned before the Wonders family became Visionary.
If you read my post closely, you would have seen that my gripe was the fact that the ball was not advertised as a z-spin ball. There is a rather large difference in layout whether you are drilling a "standard" ball as opposed to a z-spin ball; at least for me anyway. Had VBP made it common knowledge that the Crossover was a z-spin, I am positive I would have done my homework to make sure I was laying the ball out correctly based on that fact. Main reason is because I remember being taught by my pro shop guy in regards to z-spins when the No Mercy was released and that the balls are laid out based on that z axis. As a person on the pro shop side of things, I do agree that there is no such thing as a bad ball. However, I also know that you can achieve a pretty bad ball reaction if you use a ball on the wrong condition and/or put an inaccurate layout in the ball.
So I guess you could say that my opinion (my ball reaction was terrible unless I manipulated the it to make it better) was based on a fact (ball was not advertised as a z-spin and therefore I put it was I considered a typical layout that has always worked well for me). ;)
-
All I know is that I want my executioners back. :'( >:( ;D ;)
-
XV hit the USBC approved list today, should be seeing it soon.
-
I would say week to ten days, if it all shakes out just a hunch 8)
-
sounds about right, id say early next week most likely
-
I talked to staffers Brandy and BJ in Memphis and they said they should get there Warlock's this week!!
-
we should have our balls by thurs or friday if so video will be up by sunday
-
we should have our balls by thurs or friday if so video will be up by sunday
I can't wait to see this ball, I really think its going to be a good one. Got mine ordered so hopefully not too much longer.
-
Should start shipping out on the 18th.
-
mine will be drilled tomorrow and with some luck video shot saturday or sunday
-
mine will be drilled tomorrow and with some luck video shot saturday or sunday
Can't wait to see this thing go down a lane..
-
Should start shipping out on the 18th.
I was told the same.
-
Ahhhh......got off the phone wth Betsy late Friday afternoon and put an order in for a new Warlock. Man....looking forward to this. The last ball I think I had NIB that I actually drilled was.....a Bronze Centaur. Jason brought a bunch of them down to TCBA Nationals a couple years ago when they were at USA Bowl and I bought one then. So it's been a little while.
Sad when I remember coming into work....and looking under my desk only to find Visionary boxes containing Violet Gargoyle, Green Gargoyle, Frankie May, Blue Warlock, Purple Ice Executioner, Ogre Urethane and a Charcoal Executioner. Those days are long gone. :'( :'( :'(
On edit....I was told a little about the ball and I think this ball might be of interest to you Scott....as it was really put in motion to satisfy a wide range of styles and lane conditions. Nothing too strong but nothing to sneeze at either. I look at this ball fitting that missing spot between my Spartan and every pearl I have as I don't have anything reactive anymore and the Purple Ice I have gotten isn't ready yet.
-
On edit....I was told a little about the ball and I think this ball might be of interest to you Scot
Sorry I have moved on Gary but wish all you VBP folks well with your new purchase.
-
Got my Warlock XV Wed, can't wait to punch it up! Sadly my driller is out of town till next Monday. Hope to shoot a video soon as I can.
-
For those that have thrown the warlock xv, how does it compare to the mixed breed crossover or mixed breed solid? I'm looking for a benchmark and heavy oil ball, and I was considering the mixed breed crossover for the benchmark and warlock xv for heavy oil. thoughts?
-
For those that have thrown the warlock xv, how does it compare to the mixed breed crossover or mixed breed solid? I'm looking for a benchmark and heavy oil ball, and I was considering the mixed breed crossover for the benchmark and warlock xv for heavy oil. thoughts?
My MBSolid was drilled about the same as my new Warlock 4.5" pin and just in the two games I have thrown it the Warlock is a 4 boards stronger but you can see the versatility of the Warlock has more potential. I have not thrown the MBC so maybe Matt C can respond to that. I really like the Warlock. Going to order another one and drill it higher pin and polish it.
-
Warlock is about 3 - 4 boards stronger than the MB crossover. Very Midlane with a very very strong arc. I also might get another and polish it.
-
Warlock is about 3 - 4 boards stronger than the MB crossover. Very Midlane with a very very strong arc. I also might get another and polish it.
Better yet.....how does this ball compare to the Frankie May Gryphon? Even at 1000 or 2000 abralon (up from the OOB 500 I believe), it was a very heavy rolling piece.
-
Never had a Frankie May, I have a g-3 and the warlock is way way way stronger.
Matter of fact I am taking mine today to hit it with a light 4000 to see if I can get it a tad longer down the lane
-
Warlock is about 3 - 4 boards stronger than the MB crossover. Very Midlane with a very very strong arc. I also might get another and polish it.
Better yet.....how does this ball compare to the Frankie May Gryphon? Even at 1000 or 2000 abralon (up from the OOB 500 I believe), it was a very heavy rolling piece.
From my memory its been a few years since I threw a FMG, you are right FMG is heavy rolling. In the three games I have thrown the XV, I think the potential versatility is a lot
like the FMG, but I think the XV is stronger by how much I am not sure because of the time in between and no way to compare the XV vs. FMG. I think the XV is more backend. Hope this helps, would be nice to compare the two though, XV has a lot of potential.
-
I wonder if Spike will chime in on this as he had the FMG and now the Warlock.
I have an old email that one of the Wonders wrote up info on each line at the time...says this on FMG:
GRYPHON line
Frankie May GRYPHON will make a stronger and sharper move on the back than the AMB or IMMORTALs because it doesn't flare as much or roll as soon. Surface can be easily adjusted to fit most conditions from med/hvy to med/light. This is a very versatile ball.
-
My Frankie May would hook too early in box finish with the stacked drill I put on it. I took it up to around 1500 polished and it was very similar to my G-3, good length and stronger backend. I never found the comfort zone with the FMG and ended up trading it off. Kind of wish I kept it and tried re-drilling it maybe, but that was a while ago. As I've only got 2 sets in with Warlock, it's hard to compare, but I will say with drill I put on it-
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b201/Spike2112/Fall%20arsenal%202012-2013/3-1-2013001.jpg
and the ball in box finish, I have an excellent combination of length, roll and hook for my style, tweener down and in shot. I get a consistent reaction through 3 game league set and the Warlock just instills confidence that I never achieved with the FMG. Hope to get a video up soon showing my Warlock in action! I was initially hesitant to pick up another ball (solely due to fact that I have too damn many right now), but I couldn't be happier picking up this gem from the good folks at VBP. Ball is a winner in my book
-
My Frankie May would hook too early in box finish with the stacked drill I put on it. I took it up to around 1500 polished and it was very similar to my G-3, good length and stronger backend. I never found the comfort zone with the FMG and ended up trading it off. Kind of wish I kept it and tried re-drilling it maybe, but that was a while ago. As I've only got 2 sets in with Warlock, it's hard to compare, but I will say with drill I put on it-
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b201/Spike2112/Fall%20arsenal%202012-2013/3-1-2013001.jpg
and the ball in box finish, I have an excellent combination of length, roll and hook for my style, tweener down and in shot. I get a consistent reaction through 3 game league set and the Warlock just instills confidence that I never achieved with the FMG. Hope to get a video up soon showing my Warlock in action! I was initially hesitant to pick up another ball (solely due to fact that I have too damn many right now), but I couldn't be happier picking up this gem from the good folks at VBP. Ball is a winner in my book
For me with my FMG, I took mine up to 4000 and no polish. I had mine drilled pin at 4.5 inches, cg stacked and a small weight hole down. The ball was killer for me when the lanes got tight. I had been looking for something to replace it since I had a ton of games with it and it was starting to die off. I thought that the Spartan was going to be that ball but the cover for whatever the reason would start tacky right after I cleaned it but once it got a little oil on it, the tackiness completely disappeared and I lost some reaction until I cleaned it again.
been kind of interesting that the buzz surrounding VBP has been very quiet over the past year or so and now that the new Warlock is coming out, there is a new buzz in the air. It is good to see.
-
The buzz has merit. The Classic, MB Crossover, and the Warlock are all good pieces.
Just missed my 2nd 300 with the warlock last night. 10 pin in the 9th.
-
warlock sweet ball, i thrown mine out of box finish, very strong ball, but might have to leave it go, bowled 2 tournment and still have not got to use it, its to strong for any house shot around my area.
-
warlock sweet ball, i thrown mine out of box finish, very strong ball, but might have to leave it go, bowled 2 tournment and still have not got to use it, its to strong for any house shot around my area.
See if you can include a pic....or at least give us the layout. Might prove useful to change surface so you can get use out of it.
-
Took mine to our Association's annual tourney and only got one game out of it. Shot was dry from the start and they didn't re-oil between shifts. Ended up using my Immortal Pearl first shift, but the lanes continued to dry out, so ended up bowling the last two sets with my Slate Blue Gargoyle. Held my own with it bowling sets of 637 and 647 with it. Haven't used it in 5 years, but decided to take it "just in case". Man am I glad I did! It saved my ass today for sure! Excellent light-oil ball...
Spike