BallReviews
General Category => Drilling & Layouts => Topic started by: dougb on August 03, 2013, 12:10:23 PM
-
Recently I bought a fully plugged AMF Heist Pearl for $25 shipped (from iamone78 here -- thanks for a heckuva deal!). As you can see from the pic, the span before plugging was close to mine and the layout was similar to what's required for a bowler with my PAP on the MOtion hole. I've been curious about this layout and figured this ball was a perfect guinea pig.
Per instructions, my driller marked the spot with tape and I threw the ball down the lane while he watched. Sure enough I was tracking over the spot. So he took the ball away, moved the hole slightly, and brought it back drilled.
I wish I had a video to demonstrate the difference. The Heist Pearl was a very limited edition ball - actually the Heists were the first balls produced out of 900G's San Antonio plant - and it was known for it's low RG core but super smooth weaker cover. This lent itself to a very predictable reaction across all lane conditions, even for a Pearl. This is always how I imagined the Seismic Aftermath Pearl to be.
Anyway, before the MOhole I was playing the same line as my Brunswick Ringer, currently one of my favorite balls. The ball motion was very similar - the classic Brunswick roll. After the hole, I was forced to move 2 boards left of the Ringer and had a good 5 more boards of recovery to the right if I threw it out. As the lanes opened up I ended up 4 boards left. When the ball hit friction you could see the revs, but with that weaker cover it didn't jump. The continuity through the pin deck was impressive. And it was carrying the corners better than before the hole. Frankly, after the MOhole it was reminding me more of my Brunswick Aura than my Ringer. I'll have to compare them next time. But the MOhole unleashed the backend on this ball.
I can't imagine what this would be like for me on a ball with similar core specs and a stronger cover. I'm sold!
-
I turned my Brunswick Combat Zone Tracer that has a diff of 0.023 into a hook monster using the Mo-Hole.
-
I turned my Brunswick Combat Zone Tracer that has a diff of 0.023 into a hook monster using the Mo-Hole.
What version or weight of Combat Zone Tracer are you throwing? There is no way that the 14# CZT (http://www.123bowl.com/ball.cfm?ballid=583 (http://www.123bowl.com/ball.cfm?ballid=583)) that I drilled up 4 years ago had that little differential... I traded it because on house shots it forced me too deep from the very beginning.
FWIW... The MOtion hole is a great layout for speed dominant bowlers like myself that are tired of lazy reactions downlane when the ball is pushed past or outside the break point.
I did a slightly weaker pin placement version of the layout on a Pursuit-S and changed the ball from "so-so" to "pry it out of my cold, dead hands"
The only ball I can remember looking this different going through the pins was either an AZO Little Boy or Apex. The ones that had the goofy twin pin cores...
-
I might try this on a Hook...
-
Old fashion weight holes are back!
I have had a couple of 9 inch from grip center weight holes, a 7 inch weighthole on my Sonic Boom and they have all done what they were supposed to do.
Lenghthen the time till the move and then increase it. As the Gravity balance system from Lane#1 says, it raises top weight and increases backend.
Others would say it increases reaction for other reasons!
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Old fashion weight holes are back!
I have had a couple of 9 inch from grip center weight holes, a 7 inch weighthole on my Sonic Boom and they have all done what they were supposed to do.
Lenghthen the time till the move and then increase it. As the Gravity balance system from Lane#1 says, it raises top weight and increases backend.
Others would say it increases reaction for other reasons!
Regards,
Luckylefty
This is not an old fashion weight hole!
For instance, using BluePrint, I modeled the layout for a weak asymmetric Mission 250K and the beginning balance hole location ended up on the direct opposite side of the ball from the finger holes.
Before drilling I would obviously follow the directions and place a piece of tape on the hole location to see if I flared over it, because as good as BluePrint might be, I will not trust it completely. It claims that my MOtion holed Pursuit-S is statically illegal but in reality it's not even close to what it computed.
Don't get me started on static weights and what Richie Sposato claims... His opinions are not relevant without factual data to back them up
-
I turned my Brunswick Combat Zone Tracer that has a diff of 0.023 into a hook monster using the Mo-Hole.
What version or weight of Combat Zone Tracer are you throwing? There is no way that the 14# CZT (http://www.123bowl.com/ball.cfm?ballid=583 (http://www.123bowl.com/ball.cfm?ballid=583)) that I drilled up 4 years ago had that little differential... I traded it because on house shots it forced me too deep from the very beginning.
..
There were several versions of the Combat Zone and Combat Zone Tracer (the pearl), just like there were of the Danger Zone. According to chart I got from a Brunswick rep back in 1997, the Combat Zone TE1 (PK 18 Pearl) and the TE2 (PowrSurge) purple pin both had a differential of .023".
-
I turned my Brunswick Combat Zone Tracer that has a diff of 0.023 into a hook monster using the Mo-Hole.
What version or weight of Combat Zone Tracer are you throwing? There is no way that the 14# CZT (http://www.123bowl.com/ball.cfm?ballid=583 (http://www.123bowl.com/ball.cfm?ballid=583)) that I drilled up 4 years ago had that little differential... I traded it because on house shots it forced me too deep from the very beginning.
..
There were several versions of the Combat Zone and Combat Zone Tracer (the pearl), just like there were of the Danger Zone. According to chart I got from a Brunswick rep back in 1997, the Combat Zone TE1 (PK 18 Pearl) and the TE2 (PowrSurge) purple pin both had a differential of .023".
Thanks Charlest! Nice to see a poster actually researching a answer before giving their opinion. Here's a link that shows this at- https://www.facebook.com/groups/393886417326249/permalink/527757980605758/?comment_id=527758030605753&offset=0&total_comments=8
-
Thanks Charlest! Nice to see a poster actually researching a answer before giving their opinion. Here's a link that shows this at- https://www.facebook.com/groups/393886417326249/permalink/527757980605758/?comment_id=527758030605753&offset=0&total_comments=8
I did research it and rather than directly answering my question, you choose this response...
-
can't wait to try this motion hole on my freight train! Yes, I can throw even a freight train through the break point! lol
-
Hmm... My freight train has a layout that this would work on...
-
Did it on a second drill Innovate and could not believe the continuation...It cracked, so trying to figure out what piece do I try it in next. EBI guy and I am doing the research right now. Any suggestions? Current arsenal highlights includes Pursuit, Exceed, 718A...need symmetrics to add..
-
i would look at one of the freezes or vibes go under the exceed and 718
-
I've put 9 inch from grip center and 10 inch from weightholes years ago and they always increased reaction.
Whether Brunswick back in their 7 suggested drillings saying these holes increase flare, Richie Sposato in his Gravity balance system saying they increase top weight and reaction. Mo Pinel saying increasing differential the final effect is they increase length and backend.
All seem to agree they increase reaction, "Why" they increase it seems to be the debate.
REgards,
Luckylefty
PS a 7 inch from grip center on my Sonic Boom made a pfft into a Boom. A 9 inch weighthole pitched away from grip center on a Revs Leveraged Pantera made it a heavy oil league superstar for me!
-
If I remember correctly, Mo Holes are 10" from the pin (rather than grip center) on symmetrical cores, although depending on the pin location and the direction you choose from the grip center, the hole locations may match up. To Lucky's point, I believe they are doing all of the claimed (increasing top weight and increasing core dynamics). The debate becomes which influences reaction (personally, I believe core dynamics trump static weights). Regardless, I do believe there is a noticeable difference.
My experience is with a RG Wrecker. I drilled it up initially w/out the hole and threw it from a couple weeks in league. A good reaction, but nothing that stood out. Put in the Mo hole and the ball acted completely different. Didn't shoot under 650 for the last 6 weeks and ended with my high set of the year 770 (a couple stoned 9 pins away from a nice 800 set).
From my limited experience and what I have read, the best results tend to be with simple symmetrical cores and weak/medium strength covers.
If anyone has other opinions/input, I would like to hear (I assume others following this post would like to hear as well).
Thank you,
Scott
-
Does the change in reaction come from the shift it causes in static weight, or does it come from the existence of the hole with the static weight changes being merely a byproduct of the holes existence?
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? And would it even matter as long as we ended up with the final product?
Adding extra holes changes reaction, changes core dynamics, but it also changes static weights, so what actually caused the reaction change, the hole itself, or the static changes?
Both camps can trot out all the evidence they want to, have all the arguments and chest bumping contests they want to, it really doesn't matter because the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.
I am no physics genius, have no degrees, have no CAD machines. All I had to go on was the RULES, and my limited experience of trial and error, yet somehow, I managed to discover that weight holes, when placed in strategic locations, could have a profound effect on a balls reaction. ONE of those locations would've been approximately where the MOtion hole ends up being today, on the "bottom" of the ball, and this was back in the 1980's.
Maybe we were suffering from ignorance back then (which may be), but we attributed the change in reaction to the shifting of the static weights. There wasn't much work back then on the dynamics of core change, so what were we supposed to attribute it to?
Suffice it to say that the holes work. They worked years ago, before they had names, and they still do, even with the new names people call them by now.
-
IMO the effect is not due to statics. I put a motion hole in a nomad Dagger. The reaction was awesome, but the ball was statically out of balance. I loved the reaction but had to make it statically legal in order to throw it in competition. Drilling the fingers deeper solved the static weight issue. But making it statically legal did not kill the enhanced reaction. Thus, I would attribute the better reaction to something other than static weight.
BTW, I have motion holed a Fire Road, Nomad Dagger, Meanstreak, Virtual Gravity and a Mission 2.
I have had very good results with the Fire Road and Nomad Dagger. Slightly improved reaction from the VG and Mission 2. And the Motion Hole turned the Meanstreak into a complete dud.
-
I just had a blue /blue Hook drilled with a MOHole and only got to throw it a few frames, just to try and get the hole drilled to the right size. Not sure if it's quite right yet but right now is about 1". My friend who layed out the ball said to just go 1 and 1/4", but the driller is doing it in increments. Still in the adjustment phase but so far I really like this drilling.
Gonna use it in league tonight so hopefully I have something good to report.
-
Juggernaut,
Back in the 80's, most everything was a pancake weight block, so those changes made a difference. Now, with the major internal influence dwarfing the static weights, it's the weight hole. As we all know, any time you put any hole in a ball, you're changing the shape of what is in there. But, with another hole, after you have already become accustomed to how that ball rolls, changing the dynamics of the weight block again, an ounce isn't going to make much difference. The shape of the thing inside matters, not 1 OZ out of 15#
-
I have a general question about this drilling.
Will this drilling work best on a low RG-high Diff ball, or a high RG-low Diff ball?
I would think the Low RG, High Diff ball would work better because of the ball wanting to move earlier, but I'm guessing.
Your thoughts?
-
I just had a blue /blue Hook drilled with a MOHole and only got to throw it a few frames, just to try and get the hole drilled to the right size. Not sure if it's quite right yet but right now is about 1". My friend who layed out the ball said to just go 1 and 1/4", but the driller is doing it in increments. Still in the adjustment phase but so far I really like this drilling.
Gonna use it in league tonight so hopefully I have something good to report.
Ok, I used it last night and did alright with it on the first game, sport shot, old wood, very old wood. Shot changes very quickly, and I either changed too fast or not fast enough. I really like the way the ball hit, very hard and very continuous.
My MOhole is a little on the small side, maybe 1 inch. My friend says to just max out the hole (1 1/4") but the driller says othewise. My question is this, do you guys that have the MOhole, do the hole in incriments or just max out? Going bigger makes it react more or less on the backend?
-
Bigger the hole, the bigger the reaction on the back.
-
I just had a blue /blue Hook drilled with a MOHole and only got to throw it a few frames, just to try and get the hole drilled to the right size. Not sure if it's quite right yet but right now is about 1". My friend who layed out the ball said to just go 1 and 1/4", but the driller is doing it in increments. Still in the adjustment phase but so far I really like this drilling.
Gonna use it in league tonight so hopefully I have something good to report.
Ok, I used it last night and did alright with it on the first game, sport shot, old wood, very old wood. Shot changes very quickly, and I either changed too fast or not fast enough. I really like the way the ball hit, very hard and very continuous.
My MOhole is a little on the small side, maybe 1 inch. My friend says to just max out the hole (1 1/4") but the driller says othewise. My question is this, do you guys that have the MOhole, do the hole in incriments or just max out? Going bigger makes it react more or less on the backend?
I have drilled four balls with the MOtion hole: A C300 Freeze, Track 607A SE, Brunswick Meanstreak Brawler, and Morich Locomotion. On all of them, I started with a 3/4" or 7/8" weight hole. I have stepped them up in 1/8" increments until I get the desired backend motion. As Impending Doom stated, the backend increases with the size of the weight hole. I've maxed out the hole size (1-1/4") on only the Track 607A SE. I had the 607A SE in the past, and did not match up with it. It is a completely different (better) reaction for me with the MOtion hole.
-
I'm no professional by any means. I've only managed to get lucky and shoot 300 once but I was in a slump the whole last season. My average was down 15 pins from the year before. I know layouts aren't supposed to make much difference but the only thing I changed was drillers. After being fed up with his attitude, I found a very good deal on an entire home proshop set up from a guy here back in April. For some reason, I drilled balls for other people but waited to drill one myself until the last week of the season.
I took an old Columbia 300 Action Max, plugged all the holes, and laid out the motion hole on it. I started with an inch hole and took a chance on it not flaring over it since the ball was already plugged anyway. Shot a slump busting 715 the first night I pulled it out. Carry and forgiveness was AMAZING!
Since then I bought a DV8 misfit pearl and a Radical Yeti and put the Motion hole on them both. I have used them each only one night. The Yeti is beast don't get me wrong, but the surprise was the MISFIT! It was like I could throw it anywhere. Miss 5 boards out and it would recover. Miss 5 boards in and it would hold.
I suggest trying this layout on something, even if it's on an old ball you have laying in the closet.
-
I've had over a dozen balls drilled with the MoHole. Seems older sym balls benefit the most. When added to a newer sym ball the reaction isn't as strong or noticeable as the older balls. My Wildcard and Tracer are now my strongest balls in terms of angle entry and out-performs the SYNC, Wrecker, Lights-Out, everything that i currently own (+200 balls).
-
So far I'm liking this drilling and have a few balls laying around the house that i hardly use . Of these balls, which one would be a good candidate for my second MOhole drilling ball?
Rotogrip SD-73 classic, green DV8 Misfit, Banger Hole Pounder Pearl, AMF Sideways and a Lane #1 Chainsaw? Leaning towards either the Misfit or Chainsaw but input would be appreciated. Oh yeah, i also have a VersaMax.
-
I was curious as well. I have a columbia 300 sharp noize I was debating adding a motion hole to. Would I need to plug and start from scratch or is a pin over bridge with a 2 inch pin appropriate? Also will it make this perl go too long and leave no time for recovery?
-
this sounds great, but with the equipment available on the market, why would you not just get a ball designed for the backend you seek?
-
this sounds great, but with the equipment available on the market, why would you not just get a ball designed for the backend you seek?
They don't really design balls that do this for low tilt, speed dominant bowlers... This layout gives those bowlers something they couldn't create before.
-
this sounds great, but with the equipment available on the market, why would you not just get a ball designed for the backend you seek?
Not sure who your question is meant for, but I have all these balls laying around doing nothing, and it will be a bit cheaper to plug and redrill than to buy a new ball. When it is time to get a brand new ball, then I cam decide what I want and for what purpose. Until then, I have these balls laying around.....
-
So far I'm liking this drilling and have a few balls laying around the house that i hardly use . Of these balls, which one would be a good candidate for my second MOhole drilling ball?
Rotogrip SD-73 classic, green DV8 Misfit, Banger Hole Pounder Pearl, AMF Sideways and a Lane #1 Chainsaw? Leaning towards either the Misfit or Chainsaw but input would be appreciated. Oh yeah, i also have a VersaMax.
Of the ones you have listed, I think the Lane #1 Chainsaw would be your best bet.
-
The sideways was not sideways as they described the reaction when it was released. I think that one would be good to try the MOtion hole. Had mine not cracked I would try it.
-
Maybe my Torrid...
-
So dumb question. My driller has never told me my pap. If my track is 2" from middle finger and 1" from thumb would my pap be less or greater than 5"?
-
So dumb question. My driller has never told me my pap. If my track is 2" from middle finger and 1" from thumb would my pap be less or greater than 5"?
Not a reliable way to tell... your tilt can be the factor that changes the location as well
-
They don't really design balls that do this for low tilt, speed dominant bowlers... This layout gives those bowlers something they couldn't create before.
This describes my style to a tee. Can you recommend a ball that would be a good choice for this style and that is a good candidate for the MO hole? Bowling on typical THS on synthetics.
-
this sounds great, but with the equipment available on the market, why would you not just get a ball designed for the backend you seek?
They don't really design balls that do this for low tilt, speed dominant bowlers... This layout gives those bowlers something they couldn't create before.
Fair enough. I wasn't trying to knock it, just trying to understand. I used to throw with my feet around center, ball crossing 2nd arrow, feather out a bit, and back to the hole. with some tinkering to my actual shot, and some more aggressive stuff, I can now play much further left with my feet (righty). And the new Totally Defiant I have with a 4.5" Pin, one of the more aggressive balls I've ever had, plenty of slide, plenty of backend.
If people have too much flare near where the motion hole would be, maybe they could try a bigger pin, seems to be more aggressive to me.
-
Maybe my Torrid...
Worked-out well on my friend's Torrid Elite with only a 5/8in MoHole. I tried it and thought it performed much better this way before the hole was added. Of course his span, pitches, PAP is close to mine. He now has a Torrid Affair with another 5/8in MoHole and is again equally pleased.
-
They don't really design balls that do this for low tilt, speed dominant bowlers... This layout gives those bowlers something they couldn't create before.
This describes my style to a tee. Can you recommend a ball that would be a good choice for this style and that is a good candidate for the MO hole? Bowling on typical THS on synthetics.
For most i'd say a symmetrical ball. The most improvements came from older sym balls with pearl or polished solid coverstocks. I'd suggest plugging a ball first to gain confidence before committing to a new ball purchase. The MoHole greatly benefits low rev to high speed bowlers. My friend Bryan who throws 18-22mph with little revs just got a Storm Marvel-S with a 5/8in MoHole in it. He's winning doubles almost everynight with high scores. Before this he was in a major slump.
-
I'd like to expand a touch on my comments before.
I was lucky enough to have some old time drillers give me some weightholes past the balls north(top) and south border(bottom) which is at 6 3/4 from the grip center.
Weightholes were often by these old timers put at 7 inches from the grip center or 9 inches from the grip center. Both in this lefty's case at a 8:30 direction from the grip center(if I had been righty it would have been at a 3:30 direction).
These drillings past the North South equator of the ball seemed to add mostly backend and reduce midlane. The Gravity balance system would say they were raising finger, raising top and reducing side. The nick the core people would say they are increasing differential(even if the core is not contacted I believe.) The Brunswick people I believe are saying they are increasing flare separation and the bigger the size of the drill bit the bigger the increase in flare separation(I hope I have that right!). I don't know why but I think they are right, but I don't know their reasons. The nick the core people I hope can help me out here too!
So be it. They reacted, and more in the back.
Today also we have from MO, new weightholes that can increase rev up(p3) and really increase rev UP(P4). Gravity Balance (from Lane 1) people would say they are decreasing top weight faster than side for every inch(or unit) of travel of the drill bit, and often adding some finger. I thinking of the gravity balance system can see how reduced top can increase early rev up and more finger can add some backend. I'll leave the explanation of how midlane and backend reaction are increased in these cases of P3 and P4 to the Nick the core and Brunswick people to point us in the right direction.
A variation on all these themes is angled away from weightholes and I don't know how the Nick the core people explain the increase in reaction(mostly midlane it seems) or the Brunswick drill weightholes off of the PAP people explain the increase in reaction if this is done on the PAP but it seems to work. Naturally the Gravity balance people have an explanation, less side taken out and more top leaves the ball more dynamic).
Anyway I extrapolated the idea of the 9 inch on my 8:30 direction a bunch of years ago and put a weighthole 10 inches from my grip center on a nice oil cheating Jade Quantum Proactive, and it increased reaction in the back about two inches. It did not nick the core, but it sure was off the PAP(for the Brunswick people). Again the Gravity balance people would say, more TOP, near similar side and added some finger.
I have compared the 10 inch Motion Hole location to the old time 10 inches from grip center and noticed in my case they are about 3 inches apart. The old 10 inch hole is straight down from the new motion hole. As a Gravity Balance person I would say the resulting holes both raise top weight, both leave side about the same(for me), and the old style hole increases finger the new "MOtion" hole increases thumb.
As to what the nick the core people would say I think I have an idea, what the Brunswick people would say I think I have an idea also.
So the 3 burning questions I have are:
1. For the nick the core people, how come weightholes that never touch the core can dramatically increase reaction?
2. For the Brunswick people when do bigger weightholes increase reaction more(I do think I can anticipate the answer, but I would like to hear it anyway. (A related question is: if a hole is very wide diameter and very shallow, will it have a greater effect on reaction than a smaller weighthole drilled deeper that has the same effect on statics(assumption both holes drilled the same distance from the PAP).
3. For both the Nick the core people and the Brunswick people, why do angled weightholes seem to increase reaction(a) for the nick the core people, even though they have less probability of nicking core? (b) for the Brunswick people, even if they have the same hole diameter size and are in the same place in relation to the PAP.
For those just enjoying the "new" weightholes, Viva la difference! I think you are right, there is more reaction later and downlane! Oui Oui!
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
A lot of good answers so far....
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Well I have two nights with my freshly mo holed Freight Train, and so far I can tell that it woke up the ball on the back. I never liked this ball much before as it seemed very condition specific, but now it will hold pulled shots better and recover better when thrown out too far. I have the surface at 3000 with polish. So if this mo hole has helped this ball out, can't wait to try it out on a nice sym pearl!
-
At no point have I dissed the ability of a "MO"tion hole to increase reaction.
Being in a similar area on the ball that the old fashion 9 inches from grip center but in a 3:30 direction from grip center holes were it doesn't surprise me at all. They have been working and helping me out with certain balls since I restarted about 14 years ago.
The question was only to the gurus out here, why their weightholes worked in many different situations. The reasoning as to why?
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Lucky,
I don't know if this answer will help, but I will give it a try. When I want to drill a weight hole only to make the ball statically legal, I typically go with a larger diameter (7/8" or 1"), and keep them shallow, as to not remove any mass from the core. If I want to enhance motion, I will drill the weight hole with a smaller diameter and a deeper depth, typically 3".
Another thing to keep in mind is that prior to drilling the MOtion hole, the fingers are drilled 3 to 3-1/2" deep. The MOtion hole is drilled 4" deep. At these depths, you are removing mass from the core, which is altering the position of the low RG, as well as changing the differential.
-
Direct,
A great answer of why the Motion holes work, not really my question but I still found it informative and interesting.
The other question I now have is the Brunswick guys are often talking about the larger diameter holes affecting the width of the flare rings, the wider the greater the spacing between the flare rings. On the other hand you seem to be promoting the contrary idea.
Another question I have is for shallow weightholes in to the PAP, why do angled away from the grip center holes in the same spot increase reaction. Especially, as they do not affect the core. I know what the Gravity balance people would say! This question is mainly directed to a "Nick the core" type of guy like yourself Direct.
Of course I am interested in the opinions of the Brunswick guys on both of the questions above.
REgards,
Luckylefty
REgards,
Luckylefty