win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: why was the striking motion a dud??  (Read 5802 times)

Aloarjr810

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2149
  • Alley Katz Strike!
why was the striking motion a dud??
« on: March 16, 2009, 01:10:08 AM »
I just recently got a striking motion (Posted a Review) and I thought it was a ok ball.

My Review Here

I got this reply in another forum

Not trying to be a jerk, but this ball is discontinued now. If you liked it you can bye them cheap. My distributor is selling the for a very cheap price. All companies have a swing and miss. I think this was a big swing and miss for Ebonite.
 
I had all ready knew of the little interest everyone had in this ball.

But what was so bad about it that no one wanted it? was it just too ordinary? too strong? too weak? etc.


--------------------
Aloarjr810
----------
Click For My Grip
Aloarjr810
----------
Click For My Grip

 

jls

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18398
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2009, 01:23:29 PM »
quote:
Is this a confirmed discontinue or rumor. I am not trying to point fingers at rumor making but it is just that the ball is fairly new on the market.
--------------------
Jason K
But be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.-W. Shakespear

Jason @Juniors Pro-Shops
LaSalle, Quebec
Located inside Pont Mercier Lanes.
Edmonton, Alberta.
Located inside Ed's Rec Room.(WEST ED MALL)
King Of Roto-Grip In Canada.

www.juniorsproshop.com





No, we have bought the ball at a special closeout price.

Nice deal!!!!!

BTW,  if you take the cover down to 2000,  the ball works better for most bowlers with less hand.  Those with hand,  we add polish.
--------------------
jls

jls

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18398
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2009, 01:48:11 PM »
Why a dud?

Well lets look at the specs:

2.56 RG
.040 diff
19 of 50... early roll???
med - heavy oil.....
OOB  4000 A-pad


Now to me,  this ball has length with a smooth backend reaction. I certainly would not refer to it as a Med - heavy oil ball.

I would refer to it, in the box finish as more of a light -med oil ball, best used on clean backends.

Now I can see why if some bowlers bought this thinking it was an oil monster, why they would not be please.



--------------------
jls

EboHammer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #18 on: March 25, 2009, 12:28:45 AM »
I am wondering why my replies in this thread have disappeared?

jls

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18398
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #19 on: March 25, 2009, 09:03:08 AM »
quote:
I am wondering why my replies in this thread have disappeared?



WOOOOO  IT'S MAGIC
--------------------
jls

Dave_in_Rio_Rancho

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #20 on: March 25, 2009, 03:24:14 PM »
My general impression was that it was like the Hammer No Mercy with a different coverstock. Ebonite's statement that it has their most durable coverstock ever leads one to assume a harder surface (less hook). The color was not it's best feature but since I liked my old Brunswick Fuze Eliminator I didn't really dislike it but wondered what the Pro Shop operators thought of it setting on the shelf. Whatever condition is was designed for seems to exist in Japan as it is very popular there. For me, it overlapped equipment I already owned: I have a go to control ball already. I agree with previous posts that it was introduced at the wrong price point. Many of the kids I bowl with like huge hooks even if they are looking at artwork all night. They really need a go to control ball, everyone does - LOL

Edited on 3/25/2009 3:32 PM

Edited on 3/25/2009 3:35 PM

Fatboy8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3265
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #21 on: March 29, 2009, 10:06:38 AM »
I just recently got one, and it's a great ball. It's my first Ebonite since the Overtime, which I loved.

I'm hoping for great things from it, and so far so good. I'm sure it'll be high maintence like all my other Hammer stuff, but should be worth it.
--------------------
Nothing Hit's Like A Hammer

Contude

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #22 on: April 02, 2009, 02:29:52 PM »
I have owned this ball for about 2 months and have to say that is does hit like a truck and carries quite a bit. Making a 2-3 board mistake either way is not the end of the world because it knows how to hold nicely and recover. The key to its demise is something that was said earlier in this thread which is carry down. This ball loses ALL of its power when there is oil in the heads and burns up to leave very weak hits. This ball needs an area of dry to work but definitely hits the wall early in the night.

qstick777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5188
Re: why was the striking motion a dud??
« Reply #23 on: April 21, 2009, 09:49:05 PM »
Surprising to see all the comments that the ball is not a hook monster.

When looking at the manufacturer's promo material:

 
quote:
The Striking Motion from Ebonite, a high performance ball featuring a Flat Iron Asymmetric Core and new Super Shell 1.0 Coverstock that helps the ball cut tightly through heavy lane oil. We’ve also designed the Striking Motion to create more overall hook than any ball we’ve ever made, making it intense, just like your game.
 



MORE HOOK THAN ANY BALL THEY'VE EVER MADE!

Don't believe the hype!



--------------------
Unoffical Ballreviews.com FAQ

Search Ballreviews entire database here

"The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose."

"Government is not the solution to our problems - government is the problem."