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

Author Topic: next idea about the Uranium HRG  (Read 647 times)

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
next idea about the Uranium HRG
« on: December 01, 2006, 09:24:45 AM »
So I was not so on-target about associating the HRG with the Silver Diamond.

So, then, while reading more opinions about the HRG, it next occured to me that it may be more similar to the Golden Nugget. Since I had one (sold it, a 15 lb, cause I'm now using 16 lbs), I think I see some correlation in behavior between the GN and the HRG. My GN was drilled mild and it went long on medium-light to medium oil, then it made it way back to the pocket with a large backend hook that was controllable but VERY surrprising in its continuity and SIZE!

Anyone else see a similarity between their HRG and their GN?

I have not yet drilled my HRG because I still don't have a good mental grip of its behavior and its prime, designed-in oil pattern. Yes, I know it goes long and hooks a lot at the backend, but that's all I've seen so far.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

 

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: next idea about the Uranium HRG
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2006, 05:51:49 PM »
quote:
My HRG was close to reaction as my Golden Nugget. A little weaker overall. I took my HRG down to 500 abralon dull, and it is really shining now.


But at 500 grit dull, it's a completely different ball, for different oil patterns with a different ball path. If this is useful now, it's good, but ...
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: next idea about the Uranium HRG
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2006, 07:36:22 PM »
quote:
At OoB with the mix of my houses ridiculously clean backends that make plastic balls snap, it was way too strong on the backend.


But even pearls need considerable oil when sanded that dull. Heck, if it works for you, who am I to argue. And that is one solution to too snappy backends.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

scotts33

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8452
Re: next idea about the Uranium HRG
« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2006, 08:39:33 PM »
Not to butt in here but when I need something that doesn't snap at backend.  

Two things, I do....which I also believe many others do also.  Stay under ball for end over end roll takes off snapping axis rotation when ball hits dry backend.  Dull up a lesser hooking ball so you can stay closer to the oil line <side to side on a THS block....where the oil drops off dramatically to the dry outside>.  

My ball for this to use is a Saturn 4.5 x 4 @1000 abralon.  Just enough pop to carry and even roll on dry backends.  Higher RG medium flare nice even roll and predictability.

But, I digress.....what interests you about the HRG Jeff?  The similairity to the Golden Nugget?  Same basic stats.?





--------------------
Scott

Logged
Scott

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: next idea about the Uranium HRG
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2006, 03:05:04 AM »
quote:
But, I digress.....what interests you about the HRG Jeff?  The similairity to the Golden Nugget?  Same basic stats.?

--------------------
Scott


Scott,

you should know by now that specs NEVER interest me. They're just part of the puzzle that is a ball.

What interested me was the Columbia coverstock (M80 variant) plus the famous PLAIN diamond core. No matter how the core was designed, it's still the basic diamond core that gives/gave true Buzzsaws their essential character.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

triggerman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3352
Re: next idea about the Uranium HRG
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2006, 06:12:13 AM »
Jeff:
having had both the Gn and now the hrg I'll put my two cents in

GN fairly long with a good move on the back, but squirty, did not like drying heads and tended to over under on spotty lanes.  seemed to burn up at times s well

Hrg, completely different animail, similar length, although a noticeable amount longer, and on fresh the backend is definitely larger.  The m80 stock sems to provide a greater recovery area, this hrg recovers from areas on fresh that my cobalt pearl would no never come back from.  one place where i saw a difference between the GN and the hrg was on carrydown.  Carrydown tends to translate a lot of nights into drying heads slicker backs, for me the GN was too much midlane on these types, burn energy up front, and die on the back, the hrg, i jsut move right some tighten my line and it never seemed to struggle to get back to the hole.  The m80 seems to be a good stock for this

As far as your comparisons to the SD?  I had 4 silver diamonds, 2 originals ad 2 remakes, and i will say the originals were a tad stronger, and all had a big back end, but they all had def a touch more midlane then this ball does.  so far on fresh this ball is longer and has a bigger backend then any of the other saws i have had, and i have had just about every one made, it provides a different look on the lanes and def provides a different recovery from the dry.  I have a Cherry c/2 tha all who see it say it is a freak of nature, which it is, and it can cover a lot of boards and comes back with autority, but the hrg recoverys better on fresh and can if need be cover a whole lot more boards.  Dont get me wrong, i cn get the others to cover that too, but if i am out at 45 with my feet, all my other saws need to play 5th arrow to about the 12 board at the break or they have nothing left, the HRG well i can stand at 45 with the feet, hit 4th arrow from way over there and go out to the 7 board area, and this ball just makes a screaming turn at about 52 feet, and sends a whole different kind of messenger.  at that deep my other saws tend to leave some nasty looking splits due to burn up, the HRG did not do that to me
--------------------
www.bowlingballexchange.com

Made member of the Lane #1 Mafia
Logged

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: next idea about the Uranium HRG
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2006, 02:00:15 PM »
triggerman,

Thanks. Lots of interesting info.

Taking into consideration your much higher rev rate (450 vs my 250-300), my GN never burned up when the midlane got slightly drier. I used it on lighter oil in a house famous for rapid pattern changes due to old wood. To be fair I didn't use it a lot.

Regarding your Cherry C/2, isn't/wasn't that a PK18 pearl?
It sounds like your SD handled carrydown better than your Cherry. (Maybe I ought to re-read what you wrote ...). I think the high flare of the cherry (vs the SD) made it burn up a little in the midlane, ESPECIALLY due to your high rev rate.That's one supposedly good thing about the HRG, the high RG, has to help it not burn up on slightly used midlanes and get good length for inside shots and its coever will aloow great recovery.. You should revel in it, given your hooking power.

Ok, I'm getting a better feel for this ball.

Now to decide where I want to use it and that wll determine how I'll drill it.

Thanks, triggerman.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Pages: [1]
« previous next »