Author Topic: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out. (Read 6758 times)

Next Level PS · « **on:** December 19, 2003, 07:38:00 AM »

There are so many theories of the balance hole. drill guys and tech guys lets view in and post a response.

1. X-hole on the PAP?
2. X-hole below the PAP?
3. X-hole Pass the VAL?
4. X-hole in side the VAL
5. X-hole Pitch away 1-1 1/4"
6. X-hole 6 3/4 away from the pin
7. X-hole 6" away from the center of grip.
8. X-hole above the PAP "short pin"

--------------------
www.bowlritelanes.com
www.nextlevelproshop.com

also know as VortexII

T-GOD · « **Reply #16 on:** January 02, 2004, 10:10:57 PM »

Brian,

quote:
If you happen to have a 2+ inch label shift in a ball that starts with a decent top weight, there's no way you can make the ball legal (under one ounce) with a large shallow hole that doesn't touch the core. So, you must drill a deeper hole and then you are changing the shape of the core and now the balls reaction.

Let's say the ball has lower top weight, so with a 2" shift, there's only 1 1/8 oz. side. Now you can make the ball legal and take most of the side weight out without hitting the core. Are you going to say there will be no difference with 1 1/8 oz. side and zero side..?

Let's forget about the ABC rule for a minute and say we can use any size hole we want. We'll just drill the side of the ball, without hitting the core, whatever size hole we want to get out 2 oz. of side weight. Will 2 oz. make a difference for you..? Remember, how much wobble is taken out of the tire of your car by pounding a 1/2 oz. weight to the rim..!!

quote:
If changing the shape of the core meant nothing, then why do ball manufacturers spend countless dollars and time designing new cores? BECAUSE THE SHAPE OF THE CORE DETERMINES THE MOTION OF THE BALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There you go again, not understanding what you read.

quote:
If you're hitting the core with the weight hole, you're NOT CHANGING THE CORE SHAPE ENOUGH TO CHANGE THE REACTION OF THE BALL..!!

This is the whole point of our debate.

quote:
You can't tell me, and I challenge you to do it, that ball "A" with a pin 4" from the PAP and the Cg 5" will react the same as ball "B" with a pin 4" from the PAP and the Cg 1"...with both of these balls having zero side weight. So if I understand your theory, because the static weights are the same, the balls should react the same.

Now are you talking about a symmetrical core ball..? If the starting CG is 5" from the PAP in 1 ball, and 1" from the PAP in another, the core will be at different angles. Yes, the 2 balls will roll different with the same static weights. But, that's not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about a ball drilled with a certain core angle. Now let's say the ball has whatever side weight, 1 1/2 oz., 0 finger weight, and 0 top weight. The ball is going to react a certain way when you throw it.

Now let's forget about ABC rules for a minute, to prove a point.

Now drill a hole on the 6 3/4 from the center of your grip, on the positive side of the ball. We're going to drill until we just reach the core, without hitting it. Now we're going to keep drilling around the side of the hole, making the hole wider, until there is no side weight left. Remember now, we didn't hit the core, so IT'S THE SAME SHAPE..!!

The ball now has 0 side, 0 finger, and 0 top. Are you going to tell me the ball will not react any different than before we put the hole in the ball..?

Now, let's plug that hole. Let's imagine we can plug the hole with the same density as the ball was when new. Or, that we didn't even drill the hole in the first place. Now, lets drill the hole 10 1/2" from the center of the grip, on the positive side of the ball.

Now we're going to drill a hole the same way, WITHOUT HITTING THE CORE. We make it wider and such until the ball ends with 1/2 side, 0 finger, and 1 1/4 top.

Remember, the CORE SHAPE IS THE SAME in both instances. The only difference is the STATIC WEIGHTS..!! Is the ball now going to roll the same as it did with the hole on the side and the ending weights 0,0,0..?

NO IT WON'T........!!!!!

We didn't change the core angle, we didn't hit the core, all we did was change the static weights. You need to understand this. Physics is physics, and that doesn't change. If statics mattered 30 years ago, they still do today, although maybe not as much. But, THE SAME RULES STILL APPLY TODAY..!! =:^D

Edited on 1/2/2004 11:14 PM

T-GOD · « **Reply #17 on:** January 05, 2004, 12:24:53 PM »

King, what do you think of my post, explaining weight holes and statics..? =:^D

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #18 on:** January 09, 2004, 10:06:11 PM »

Brian,

you know I respect your work.

However, I must confess I've put weightholes in balls that affected reaction that were not hitting the core.

REgards,

Luckylefty

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #19 on:** January 09, 2004, 10:21:34 PM »

Brian,

you know I respect your work.

However, I must confess I've put weightholes in balls that affected reaction that were not hitting the core.

REgards,

Luckylefty

T-GOD · « **Reply #20 on:** January 10, 2004, 11:34:43 AM »

Thank you Lefty. Brian, it's about time you did some experimenting with weight holes..!! =:^D

Author Topic: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out. (Read 6758 times)

Next Level PS

ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out.

T-GOD

Re: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out.

T-GOD

Re: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out.

LuckyLefty

Re: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out.

LuckyLefty

Re: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out.

T-GOD

Re: ROLL OF THE HOLE!!! come on guys check this one out.