Author Topic: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal (Read 25533 times)

Stormroto22 · « **on:** October 06, 2015, 06:28:51 PM »

Hey guys, I'm currently using some storm and roto grip equipment and have been interested in brunswick for a while. Wondering what you guys think would be a good league arsenal and maybe some tournaments as well? Currently I have a storm rocket, iq tour solid, ride, and a roto grip hysteria. What do you guys think would be good for brunswick? I don't have my exact parameters, but my rev rate is higher than average, my ball speed is 16.5, right handed. Thanks in advance!

tkkshop · « **Reply #31 on:** October 07, 2015, 04:48:14 PM »

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 04:34:43 PM

If you were to take two undrilled balls with identical covers and core numbers, it wouldn't matter the shape.

Coverstock is king, always will be.

Also, after drilled numbers are more important than what's advertised. With the patented Radical Finger Scoop core, you can really change the shape of a reaction just by a different layout.

but you said cover was king and always will be. Then core numbers matter post drilling. I see that Radical has scoop tech that allows for more drilling options. Does this mean that the Brunswick and DV8 cores are inferior to those of Radical? Fill in the blanks for me please.

BrunsNick · « **Reply #32 on:** October 07, 2015, 04:54:57 PM »

Yes cover is king and Brunswick and DV8 have the most advanced coverstock in Composite Technology.

As an intelligent guy I inferred that you would realize they were not equal in importance, merely making a list and giving an example since cores were brought up in the discussion.

BowlingforSoup · « **Reply #33 on:** October 07, 2015, 05:00:26 PM »

Not sure why I am being quoted.I was answering the post.The guy is asking about switching brands and that's what my post is about.This is why I hardly ever post.Someone always takes things wrong or gets pissy stating the facts.I have seen your many posts about why you throw lighter balls.I understand fully why you throw Motiv.I have had four back surgeries myself.I feel your pain.I have dropped weight myself to 14 and it has only helped me.I still carry 220 average.So do not think my post was toward any thing you said because I mentioned a Motiv ball.Maybe I am the one taking your post wrong.Anyways continue to throw what you can score best with.For me its Brunswick and I do like what Radical is doing not the same ole recycling the same ole core crap.

Bowlaholic · « **Reply #34 on:** October 07, 2015, 06:50:30 PM »

I was going to provide my opinion for a Brunswick/DV8/Radical arsenal, but then I noticed the OP asked foe the same for Motiv, while he also asked for additional recommendations for his Storm/Roto arsenal. All this based on very limited personal information provided by the poster.
All the recommendations stated are great, but no one can really know if they are right for Storm/roto22. We don't know all his personal specs, how and where he bowls.
I admit, I got the feeling he is on a fishing expedition.....is he really wanting to switch brands, if so then why ask for additions to his Storm/Roto arsenal. Regardless, I think he needs to sit down with his PSO and map out a ball plan, based on more and better personal specs, and how and where he bowls if he is really serious about establishing a arsenal that's right for himelf.

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #35 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:24:50 PM »

I agree that coverstocks are most important. No argument from me there.

However in looking at cores, if the cores are not important, then why do companies put different cores in different coverstocks on their 14-15-16 lb balls? Why don't they have just one core and put all of their different coverstocks on the one single core in their heavier weight balls? ... That is what they do on 12 & 13 lb balls is one core in all coverstocks, so why don't they do it on all weights if the core doesn't matter?

BallReviews-Removed0385 · « **Reply #36 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:35:01 PM »

Brick,

Part of the reason for the different core is that in order to make the ball heavier (14-16) it probably needs a larger core. (Core shapes alone can be misleading because the density, and where the dense material is located affects how the core performs.)

In the 12 and 13 weight balls the core must be smaller, or less dense, or both in order to change weight enough. I hope I'm not off on this. I'm just thinking out loud, so to speak...

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #37 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:36:53 PM »

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 03:24:29 PM

BALL "A"
WEIGHTS - 16 / 15 / 14 / 13 / 12
RG RATING - 2.54 / 2.55 / 2.56 / 2.60 / 2.67
RG DIFFERENTIAL - .049 / .050 / .054 / .055 / .040

BALL "B"
WEIGHTS - 16 / 15 / 14 / 13 / 12
RG RATING - 2.466 / 2.477 / 2.494 / 2.569 / 2.612
RG DIFFERENTIAL - 0.054 / 0.054 / 0.054 / 0.043 / 0.043

If you're going strictly off core performance for lighter weight balls, here are 2 examples of Ball "A" vs Ball "B". Any observations?

Based on nos. that work best for me ......

If I could move up to 13# like I did 6-7 months ago before more back surgery was required, ball "A" would be a great fit for me.

If I have to remain at 12# and not allowed to move up in weights anymore, then ball "B" would have a slight edge over Ball "A".

BrunsNick · « **Reply #38 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:39:13 PM »

Is core shape more important to you or is the actual core numbers?

We could make every shape in a lighter weight ball, but the reason we don't is because the dynamic integrity of that shape gets compromised as you make everything lighter. The reason we use a more traditional core in light weight balls is to get as close to the RG Diff as possible. RG's will change, almost always a considerable difference between 14# and 12#, but we can manage how much a ball will flare.

A few competitors balls in 12# have almost HALF the differential as their 14# counterpart, even more so on their 15#. Might be the "same" shape, but definitely not the same.

tkkshop · « **Reply #39 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:40:03 PM »

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 04:54:57 PM

Yes cover is king and Brunswick and DV8 have the most advanced coverstock in Composite Technology.

As an intelligent guy I inferred that you would realize they were not equal in importance, merely making a list and giving an example since cores were brought up in the discussion.

so you leave Brunswick and DV8's cores out of the core comparison and now Radicals covers out of this coverstock talk.

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #40 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:40:56 PM »

Quote from: Brickguy221 on October 07, 2015, 07:24:50 PM

I agree that coverstocks are most important. No argument from me there.

However in looking at cores, if the cores are not important, then why do companies put different cores in different coverstocks on their 14-15-16 lb balls? Why don't they have just one core and put all of their different coverstocks on the one single core in their heavier weight balls? ... That is what they do on 12 & 13 lb balls is one core in all coverstocks, so why don't they do it on all weights if the core doesn't matter?

Filler changed the way ball companies could use and design bowling balls. Because of filler they can use the same weight core in 14, 15, and 16 pound bowling balls. Saves money on core cost. Lighter weights going below 14 would appear to require an even lighter core then those of the higher weights. Which equals higher cost. As bowling has advanced along with the ideas behind it and the understanding of bowling equipment I believe they realized that they can go with a more generic core and let the cover still be the difference. Too much change to the original core would probably result in something all together different then desired.

Morich use to keep the same core specs on all ball weights and advertised that.....so if the ball was 13 or 16 the ball had the same RG, DIFF and IntDiff. Cost more to do and the end results obviously did not justify the means. They also ran the idea for years that asymmetric cores were the only core needed for todays oils for a while before magic changed things and then symmetric cores were needed too. Trends of selling product vs the tructh

You will see it on here from time to time of bowlers complaining that they throw 14lbs and its specs are different from the 15lb and that they cant use a core with the specs the 14lb ball has. (example of a real complaint on here in reference to Storm and a ball 14lbs rg of 2.55 vs 15lbs 2.53)

If it matters that much in your mind then nothing will likely change that, why not contact some of the manufactures and ask them how they test the lighter weight bowling balls with generic cores and how they compare to the heavier weights? iT cant hurt to ask if it matters to you?

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #41 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:46:50 PM »

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 07:39:13 PM

Is core shape more important to you or is the actual core numbers?

We could make every shape in a lighter weight ball, but the reason we don't is because the dynamic integrity of that shape gets compromised as you make everything lighter. The reason we use a more traditional core in light weight balls is to get as close to the RG Diff as possible. RG's will change, almost always a considerable difference between 14# and 12#, but we can manage how much a ball will flare.

A few competitors balls in 12# have almost HALF the differential as their 14# counterpart, even more so on their 15#. Might be the "same" shape, but definitely not the same.

Nick, that core in lighter weight balls isn't going to give the ball the same shape and looks on the lane as the different high performance core does in the heavier balls is it? I don't know the answer, just asking here as I am trying to kearn something and would love to go back to Brunswick again.

BrunsNick · « **Reply #42 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:49:03 PM »

Quote from: tkkshop on October 07, 2015, 07:40:03 PM

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 04:54:57 PM
Yes cover is king and Brunswick and DV8 have the most advanced coverstock in Composite Technology.

As an intelligent guy I inferred that you would realize they were not equal in importance, merely making a list and giving an example since cores were brought up in the discussion.
so you leave Brunswick and DV8's cores out of the core comparison and now Radicals covers out of this coverstock talk.

According to Throbot and every magazine review, Guru and Guru Master hook more than anything on the market. Didn't want to sound like a broken record bringing up that accolade.

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #43 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:53:09 PM »

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 07:39:13 PM

Is core shape more important to you or is the actual core numbers?

Core shape and nos are important to me. If I like the looks of a ball on how the heavier weight balls look-perform when others throw them, then I want the same looks on the lighter ball with that same coverstock.

BrunsNick · « **Reply #44 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:54:35 PM »

Quote from: Brickguy221 on October 07, 2015, 07:46:50 PM

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 07:39:13 PM
Is core shape more important to you or is the actual core numbers?

We could make every shape in a lighter weight ball, but the reason we don't is because the dynamic integrity of that shape gets compromised as you make everything lighter. The reason we use a more traditional core in light weight balls is to get as close to the RG Diff as possible. RG's will change, almost always a considerable difference between 14# and 12#, but we can manage how much a ball will flare.

A few competitors balls in 12# have almost HALF the differential as their 14# counterpart, even more so on their 15#. Might be the "same" shape, but definitely not the same.

Nick, that core in lighter weight balls isn't going to give the ball the same shape and looks on the lane as the different high performance core does in the heavier balls is it? I don't know the answer, just asking here as I am trying to kearn something and would love to go back to Brunswick again.

I'd love for you to come back to Brunswick. You were a big fan and great forum contributor for a long while. Maybe I could even do a Throbot test 12# vs 14#? Might be worth looking into.

Bottom line, the R&D has shown the generic core with stable and time tested performance is a much better option for 12-13lb.

tkkshop · « **Reply #45 on:** October 07, 2015, 07:56:53 PM »

Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 07:49:03 PM

Quote from: tkkshop on October 07, 2015, 07:40:03 PM
Quote from: BrunsNick on October 07, 2015, 04:54:57 PM
Yes cover is king and Brunswick and DV8 have the most advanced coverstock in Composite Technology.

As an intelligent guy I inferred that you would realize they were not equal in importance, merely making a list and giving an example since cores were brought up in the discussion.
so you leave Brunswick and DV8's cores out of the core comparison and now Radicals covers out of this coverstock talk.

According to Throbot and every magazine review, Guru and Guru Master hook more than anything on the market. Didn't want to sound like a broken record bringing up that accolade.

how'd these balls do on tour? Just wondering.

Author Topic: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal (Read 25533 times)

Stormroto22

Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

tkkshop

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

BrunsNick

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

BowlingforSoup

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

Bowlaholic

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

Brickguy221

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

BallReviews-Removed0385

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

Brickguy221

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

BrunsNick

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

tkkshop

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

kidlost2000

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

Brickguy221

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

BrunsNick

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

Brickguy221

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

BrunsNick

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal

tkkshop

Re: Thinking of switching companies, need ideas on a new arsenal