win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: pin up versus pin down  (Read 15975 times)

militant02

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
pin up versus pin down
« on: December 18, 2009, 02:48:57 PM »
i've read that placing a pin above the average bowler's finger gives a ball more length and a stronger move at the breakpoint while placing it below the fingers makes a ball react earlier and smoother. does the pin up ball have a stronger move because it stores more energy? all things being equal, which pin placement would be better for oily lanes for the average bowler (16-17mph, 325rpm, 30* rotation)?
Logged

 

DougS

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
Re: pin up versus pin down
« Reply #16 on: December 27, 2009, 09:24:15 AM »
Have you decided on assymetrical or symmetrical or are you unsure?  I am asking because you also have the effect of a weight hole, the VAL placement and pin out distance will effect the type of weight hole you can use or if you can have a weight hole at all.  Your going to get more midlane roll with a weight hole.  I don''t get enough down lane reaction out of a pin down ball on long oil regardless of surface preparation so pin down is not an option for me. What drillings have been successful in the past for you and what hasn''t?

Edited on 12/27/2009 10:50 AM
Logged

Xcessive_Evil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1853
Re: pin up versus pin down
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2009, 06:31:31 PM »
quote:
The drilling and VAL angles are very accurate in predicting reaction but as was mentioned you can sum it all up with a statement that "pin up reacts quicker to friction than pin down".  30 degrees is probably as small of a VAL angle is you want to try and anything less than a 25 degree drilling angle is going to be pretty smooth off the spot and have a limited window of effectiveness. Edited on 12/26/2009 8:42 PM


I agree with the first half of this.  I just recently drilled what was to be a test ball only(Track Kinetic Energy) with a 35* 5" 20*(obviously pin up).  When the ball hit the dry spot, it was most definitely the proverbial hockey stick backend.  With this layout, I most definitely need not only oil length, but oil volume as well.
--------------------
www.youtube.com/track8401

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v690/Phoenix_RsX/Arsenal/
Logged

militant02

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: pin up versus pin down
« Reply #18 on: December 27, 2009, 10:16:15 PM »
doug s, i'm getting a virtual energy for medium-heavy, magic action for mediums and a columbia sharp noise for medium-dry. i'm hoping that i can drill them so that their reactions are different enough that i can cover the oil patterns that i see. oh yeah, i plan on using anywhere from 40* to 55* angles for the first angle so the odds are that i'll need a weight hole for the ve and ma. i also use morich weight hole deal to figure out where i'm going to drill one.
Logged

Jay

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1312
Re: pin up versus pin down
« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2010, 03:57:48 AM »
quote:
You are correct except for the length part. Pin up or pin down alone does not control length. If cover is the same and pin to pap distance is the same, then the difference between pin up vs pin down is how the ball reads friction.


quote:
+1 Here

Length can be adjusted with surface prep. How you want the ball to react to (adequate) friction should be your determining factor when deciding pin up or pin down.


Not saying I disagree, but you guys appear to be in the minority on this.  The article in the link posted earlier indicates that it's better to control length through other methods.  I'm just wondering, would you use MB position or pin position primarily to do this?  I know pin distance is more important, but if you expect to see a certain amount of flare and that wouldn't allow the ball to go as long as you'd want, would you use MB position to create more length?
--------------------
Justin
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »