Author Topic: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set) (Read 3407 times)

triggerman · « **on:** October 22, 2007, 05:39:43 AM »

not ready for a real review as I have not had my hand in the ball but for two games on a used up shot.

lanes are synthetic overlasy 40ish feet of oil ths, punched the ball up on sunday, got to hit the lanes after about 14 games of youth bowlers on it. so backs a tad soft, but the outside still violent

Me:
pap 5 over up 0, 17 mph, 425 plus revs
ball:
15# 3 oz with 4.5 top and 2-3 pin
drilling:
pin in ring, mass bias even with thumb 2.5 inches right of thumb, basically 4.5 pin to pap, mb at about 50*

first impressions: smooth on the lanes, did not over react up front, but once to the dry the ball moved and moved hard, tremendous hit and carry, great looking peice on the lanes as well. I will be throwing this ball on 4 different shots/surfaces this week, will be posting up a formal review of this ball on friday. so far very impressive, as what i have seen thus far this ball will replace my off colored cherry c2, great looking addition to the supernova line, cannot wait to put this thru the paces, short amount of time in my hands, it has garnered attention like you wouldnt beleive. will def be a big seller/must have
--------------------
www.bowlingballexchange.com

Triggerman

F.O.S Loud, F.O.S. Proud

Lane #1 Baby

Edited on 10/24/2007 7:04 AM

mrbowlingnut · « **Reply #1 on:** October 22, 2007, 01:45:51 PM »

Stronger than Evo or Nebula

Stronger than c2??? Just wondering what your take is for this ball, i wonder if same exact cover on the NightHawk Pearl???

triggerman · « **Reply #2 on:** October 22, 2007, 02:00:29 PM »

stronger off the dry then the evo, comparable length, cover is a combination of pearls I am told, so not sure how it is to the new night hawk pearl, this ball for me seems to have a similar backend movement to my cherry c/2. the hit in my opinon is better. it is tough for me to compare so early, having only two games on the ball thus far, plus the drillings between the cherry ande xp are night and day. IE pin under stacked for the c/2 vs pin in ring mb kicked out on the xp. but I like what i have seen, and the solid SN took about 7 games or so for it really to come alive, I cant wait to see how this does on the sqeaky backends I will have on weds and thursday. if this ball does what I think it will do, I am going to be very very satisfied
--------------------
www.bowlingballexchange.com

Triggerman

F.O.S Loud, F.O.S. Proud

Lane #1 Baby

revTrex · « **Reply #3 on:** October 22, 2007, 02:09:08 PM »

If it was the same cover, you'd have to wonder about the substantial price difference even more than you usually would. Why would you pay $60-100 more for a Saw, when you could have an almost identical ball reaction for so much less?

I ask this not in the hope of criticizing Lane 1 or pushing AMF, but I would think that it just wouldn't make for good business sense if mrbowlingnut's suggestion was true. Then again, people will pay for a name...

I doubt they are the exact same cover, though they have similar coloration. Dyes do not a cover make.

Furthermore, it should be noted that Lane 1, MoRich, and other companies whose balls feature non-in-house coverstocks, often make requests in regards to the formulations desired. Whether it be because of an additive or some other modification, the Lane 1 covers are most likely not the same as 900G's or AMF's.

On a side note, unless you have evidence or first-hand knowledge, I would think it best to not spread falsities, or even wonder in such a way as to create a false impression. And if you do have evidence, then proclaim it. Until then, all you are doing is stirring a pot that doesn't need stirring. It would be unfair to AMF, 900G, and Lane 1, to hint at something nigh-deceitful, without giving ample explanation for your thoughts (besides the color of the balls).

302efi · « **Reply #4 on:** October 22, 2007, 03:35:37 PM »

quote:
Dyes do not a cover make.

If you ask Brunswick it does

To be honest, whats really wrong with a company just changing around some names and using the same covers on other makes of balls ?

I mean it saves money as no further R&D is needed and as long as its quality cover, by all means reuse it on some other gear !

Whenever Lane #1 used Brunswick and used the regular PK18 and Activator, the balls were money !
--------------------
Roto-Grip

When faced with a difficult situation, Jesus asks himself, "What would Chuck Norris do?"

Robo-Arm bowlers SUCK...

Edited on 10/22/2007 3:36 PM

Steven · « **Reply #5 on:** October 22, 2007, 03:35:43 PM »

quote:
If it was the same cover, you'd have to wonder about the substantial price difference even more than you usually would. Why would you pay $60-100 more for a Saw, when you could have an almost identical ball reaction for so much less?

revTrex: As with most Saws, what you're buying is the core. I'm not saying diamond based cores react better, but they are subtly different. For some bowlers, that difference is a good thing and worth whatever price difference you might see. If a bowler believes (right or wrong) that the 'difference' is worth 5-10 pins a game in average, then $60 difference is a nit.
--------------------
"Sometimes, the best move is the one we don't make"

revTrex · « **Reply #6 on:** October 22, 2007, 10:22:17 PM »

The NHP is a mid-price to mid-plus -- meaning that it is around 170-180 dollars in a pro shop around here.

Average Saw -- 230-270

Do the math.

triggerman · « **Reply #7 on:** October 22, 2007, 11:15:15 PM »

i can do oh so much better then those prices, supporting your local shop is a grand thing, but when the local is ripping you off, sometimes it pays to branch out
--------------------
www.bowlingballexchange.com

Triggerman

F.O.S Loud, F.O.S. Proud

Lane #1 Baby

revTrex · « **Reply #8 on:** October 22, 2007, 11:29:20 PM »

Trig, I know you can do better. That wasn't my point, exactly...BO said I could get a Saw "for as little as" 20-25 dollars more than a typical premium ball...which would still put the NHP as 60-70 dollars less...thus my earlier post.

Anyways...sorry for getting this little post off the main topic.

Were you able to confirm the use of a "new" formulation? Is the XP really XPlosive, or is it just another name for a common cover?

scotts33 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 22, 2007, 11:36:57 PM »

I removed my off topic post. It's too far off this topic.

Edited on 10/23/2007 4:56 AM

revTrex · « **Reply #10 on:** October 23, 2007, 12:55:55 AM »

Hahahaha...you want to compare apples to oranges, BO, in the hope of furthering your desperate argument:

If I bought the NHP online or through my normal means...I could have it for 115-130 drilled, out the door. Again, much less than your "reduced cost" Saw.

Furthermore, your insistence that, "plus, the Saw is a premium"..."while the NHP is mid-plus"...has nothing whatsoever to do with performance (price does not equal success, especially in the case of so-called "uber-premium" brands such as Lane #1). It's the biggest bunch of laughable BS the world has ever seen; the Kool-Aid must have gone straight to your head, bro. It makes me wonder, do you feel special with a Saw in your bag? Does it make you feel more manly?

You Sawheads sure are loyal, though; I'll give you that. Any fan that is willing to stand by and defend a company that can't even get the grammar, syntax, and word choices right in its marketing releases impresses the hell out of me. From the "tedious" testing that went into the first Supernova, to the XP "reeking" havoc, I've got to hand it to the folks at Lane #1. Way to go Ritchie -- you can design bowling balls, sell them slightly above their true value because of a created image, possibly use other companies' covers while still calling them something else...but you still can't make it out of English Language 101, or, God forbid, elementary school...

All the diamonds in the world, and all Ritchie has is an inability to read the dictionary or proofread his work before it goes to print.

-- That's all she wrote, Madame.

triggerman · « **Reply #11 on:** October 23, 2007, 07:50:47 AM »

quote:
Were you able to confirm the use of a "new" formulation? Is the XP really XPlosive, or is it just another name for a common cover?

I was told by my rep that this cover is a combination of pearls, it has the same base as the evolution, but has an additional pearl formulation added to it. the ball feels tackier then the Evolution, grips more in the mid lane, and def moves harder off the dry then the evo. I have similar drillings on the two balls, pin to pap is right at 4.5 with the evo being pin under, and the XP being pin in ring, mass bias on evo is closer to thumb, where as the XP is kicked a little further right.

As far as the XP I will be punching a hole in the side of it tonight, as I saw way too much mid lane, and not enough push to get it out where I needed to play, even on a heavier shot.(side and thumb are pretty high on this ball, need to take some of it out this evening)

I will say once I get this dialed in, based upon what I have seen thus far, this ball will give anything out this year a run for ball of the year. I like my lane #1 stuff, but this ball flat out shines I really thought the supernova could not be improved on, but this ball makes it look old lol (and the solid SN is money to me, shot 650+ 3 of my last 4 leagues
--------------------
www.bowlingballexchange.com

Triggerman

F.O.S Loud, F.O.S. Proud

Lane #1 Baby

revTrex · « **Reply #12 on:** October 23, 2007, 08:25:33 AM »

Thank you, Trig, for answering the original question on everyone's mind.

On edit -- FYI, BO, the comparison to the NHP was originally based off the concern of a few folks that the cover on the XP was almost the same as the one on the NHP. As we all know the cover is the most important factor in ball reaction (it is, end of story, we can run tests till the cows come home), it would seem the comparison wasn't all that off -- mildly asymmetrical core with a strong (possibly quite similar) pearl cover. The descriptions people have been giving about the XP match up almost exactly with the descriptions some have about the NHP -- that's all I'm saying.

Edited on 10/23/2007 8:28 AM

T-GOD · « **Reply #13 on:** October 23, 2007, 11:36:13 AM »

The numbers should be the same as the SuperNova. =:^D

triggerman · « **Reply #14 on:** October 23, 2007, 11:53:50 AM »

quote:
anyone have the numbers for the XP? I found the NHP, 2.52/.042, but I am interested in the XP, as long as it doesnt have the same cover as the NHP. I am guessing that the XP has a stronger MB? That would explain the stronger midlane, but, they were both produced at the same plant, and they look the same, I may be talking myself out of spending the extra money.

different covers, if not mistaken the night hawk pearl is an exact remake of the original, the XP had a tweaked formulation for a coverstock, something lane #1 helped mix

I would assume the numbers are the same too
--------------------
www.bowlingballexchange.com

Triggerman

F.O.S Loud, F.O.S. Proud

Lane #1 Baby

Author Topic: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set) (Read 3407 times)

triggerman

XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

mrbowlingnut

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

triggerman

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

revTrex

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

302efi

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

Steven

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

revTrex

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

triggerman

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

revTrex

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

scotts33

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

revTrex

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

triggerman

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

revTrex

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

T-GOD

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)

triggerman

Re: XP, first impresions (300 game in second set)