win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads  (Read 20798 times)

Ernie McCracken

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« on: January 23, 2005, 08:14:38 AM »
For years, I've sanded my equipment using a spinner and wet sandpaper.  Recently, I've been hearing that Scotch Brite pads are the best.  If you've used both, which one do you feel gave you better results and why?  I only ask because I'm having a hard time finding the pads and when I do find them, they cost an arm and a leg.  Thanks.
--------------------
Evolutionary.  Revolutionary.
Logged

 

a_ak57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10584
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2005, 04:16:30 PM »
People only say scotchbrite if you are using particle balls, because sandpaper will sand down the particles, killing them.  If you are just sanding normal resin stuff, sandpaper is fine.
--------------------
- Andy


Brunswick..........'Nuff said.
Logged

stanski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2709
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2005, 11:29:42 PM »
scotchbrite's seem to last a lot longer, another reason they might be a better choice.
--------------------
stanski
Logged

RevChallenged

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2005, 07:46:50 PM »
I have mostly particle equipment and scotchbrite is great for that. I still use wet sandpaper on the reactive resin ball I own. The reasoning is that sandpaper smooths out too much or removes the particles that make a particle ball hook and lessens the reaction, while scotchbrite removes only the coverstock material around the particles while leaving the particles mostly intact thereby enhancing the reaction. I can feel the difference on the surface of my particle balls because they feel a lot smoother when sanded, but feel more textured when scotchbrited.

Try www.wildoctopusbowling.com because they have a good variety of scotchbrite pads at $1.55 apiece if you order 4 or more. That is much cheaper than you find them at autoparts stores and you can cut a large scotchbrite pad into about 4 hand-sized pads to make it last longer.


Edited on 1/25/2005 8:44 PM

Edited on 1/25/2005 8:51 PM
Logged

dizzyfugu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7606
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2005, 09:52:28 AM »
Scotchbrite pads are handy because the are more stable than sandpaper and flexible, so that it has better contact with the ball surface - either wet or dry. For a finer or sheen finish, I'd take sandpaper, though.

Additionally I think that the pads offer more abrasion through their flexible design, which also makes the easy to clean. If I take a white pad or 1.000 grit paper, the pad will cause more (but more thorough) abrasion. Guess the spaces between the single grains is less dense on a pad than on paper.


--------------------

DizzyFugu --- Reporting from Germany

"All that we see or seem, is but a dream within a dream..." - Edgar Allen Poe
Logged
DizzyFugu ~ Reporting from Germany

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2005, 12:24:27 PM »
GregT: You are correct -- Trizact only only Brunswick particles.

Even on different manufacturer equipment, sandpaper is sometimes recommended. I remember e-mailing Track sometime back on what's best for the particle Silencer. They went with sandpaper over scotchbrite.

It's always best to contact the respective ball company to find what works best on a given cover.
--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "

Edited on 1/27/2005 1:21 PM
Logged

Brickguy221

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9918
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2005, 02:08:28 PM »
quote:
GregT: You are correct -- Trizact only only Brunswick particles.
Steven, I just talked to Tom Tomaras last week about adjusting the cover on my Impulse Zone and he said to use Scotchbrite pads......
--------------------
Why do you need my signature?....You know who I am.
Logged
"Whenever I feel the urge to exercise I lie down until the feeling passes away"

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2005, 02:34:24 PM »
Brickguy: I was thinking about higher load Brunswick coverstock particles -- the Super Carbide bomb in particular. My mistake in not being more specific.

Regardless, I also said:

 
quote:
It's always best to contact the respective ball company to find what works best on a given cover.


Which you did to get the correct info for your Impulse Zone. The whole point is that it's too simplistic to say scotchbrite for particles and sandpaper for regular resins. It's true in many cases, but there are enough exceptions to make the effort to verify what's best for a specific cover.
--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "

Edited on 1/27/2005 3:32 PM
Logged

JohnP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2005, 10:30:01 AM »
Steven -- I talked to my Lane 1 rep about 6 months ago regarding adjustment of the surface of their balls, esp. the SC Bomb.  He said they disagree with Brunswick and to use whatever I wanted, ScotchBrite, sandpaper, etc.  --  JohnP
Logged

mrbowlingnut

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5727
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2005, 10:43:19 AM »
I have a spinner and have used everything made, scotchbrite pad, sand paper, liquid sandpaper and ebonite quik sand. The best thing i have used is Abralon pads they come in almost every grit and water passes through pads easily and the pattern on each pad is always the same. It is what ebonite uses at the factory to finish each dull ball they make, they are under 5 bucks each and evn by hand work wonders. BY far the most even perfect looking surface option i have used and almost use no other means now by spinner or hand.
Logged

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2005, 11:03:39 AM »
mrbowlingnut: I'd like to try the Abralon pads myself. Where do you get yours from?

--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "
Logged

Brickguy221

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9918
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2005, 11:11:57 AM »
quote:
mrbowlingnut: I'd like to try the Abralon pads myself. Where do you get yours from?  


Barry, me too. Could you furnish the same information to me?
--------------------
Why do you need my signature?....You know who I am.
Logged
"Whenever I feel the urge to exercise I lie down until the feeling passes away"

Old Coach

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #12 on: January 28, 2005, 11:16:50 AM »
I agree with Mrbowlingnut, I have been resurfacing for a long time and abralon works beautifully, no sand lines. Sand paper and scotchbrite are also good but for final finishing the Abralon is the best.  You have to watch where you buy it as the prices really vary.  The following is the best price I have found, shipping was like $14 but I ordered alot.  Hope this helps.
http://www.toolpeddler.com/abralonMirka.htm
Logged

mrbowlingnut

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5727
Re: Sandpaper vs. Scotch Brite pads
« Reply #13 on: January 28, 2005, 11:56:32 AM »
I pay 5 bucks each from my local proshop so Dales source is better for you guys, i have surfaced friends equipment and then tell me how great of a job i do. Its not me you cant screw up using these pads so they are worth every penny, i use a 500 rarely, 1000 all the time and also the 2000 alot. My proshop guy tells me the 4000 pad polishes the ball nicely without using polish at all. He ran out of them but if he gets them again i will try these out too, i have been using the same pads for two months and have noticed no difference in performance usage.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »