Author Topic: Benchmark ball (Read 2455 times)

golfnutFL · « **on:** October 06, 2006, 01:29:07 PM »

I'm going to post my entire arsenal here. I'm doing this because I am not comfortable that I have a benchmark ball, the ultimate starting point to help me read the lanes and help me determine what to throw and when to change it. Not all of this is L/LM related but so much of my current arsenal is L/LM that I am most comfortable hearing/reading the opinions of those who love L/LM equipment, which I do.

Some history first. The last 2 seasons I had balls that I thought, and were very effective for me, as benchmark balls. They were the X-Factor Ace and the Hybrid Dirty Bomb. I'm not sure that I ever had a ball that read the lanes better for me than the Ace, but the HDB was pretty effective also.

I moved away from Lane #1 and Storm for the same reason I've moved away from Columbia, Track, Ebonite and Brunswick. I hate the BS marketing of some of the stuff they release...i.e. Storm's heavy oil stuff (Fear Factor/Trifecta), Brunswick's Inferno series, Ebonite's Instinct and One series, everything Track released while Del was away, Columbia's Bully series (though I liked the Throttle run and the Action run seems pretty good too) and Lane #1's Bombs (as stated liked the HDB, was not thrilled with the CB, BCB or SCB).

Anyway, because of this I've decided to try the smaller manufacturers that produce their own stuff, specifically L/LM and Visionary. However, in accummulating a bunch of balls from these guys I've yet to find what I consider a "benchmark", the ball upon which I base my initial reaction to the lanes and the adjustments that I'll make.

Here's the arsenal:

L/LM
Big Bang
World Class
Terminator
World Class Reactive
Masterpiece

Visionary
AMB Particle
Slate Blue Gargoyle

I've also got a Track Solution Power PLus EX, Burgundy Pure Hammer and a White Dot.

In my attempt to find a benchmark I have just ordered a Black Pearl and a Visionary Solid Immortal. I am hoping that one of those will provide me with the comfort of the "benchmark". I'm sure that many of you know what I mean by that.
My 1st games have suffered this year because of that lack of confidence in a "lane reader".

Since I've pretty much committed myself to L/LM and Visionary equipment I am very interested in hearing any feedback that any of you may have.
--------------------
Don't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.

stringer · « **Reply #1 on:** October 06, 2006, 10:03:04 PM »

I don't own any of the balls you have, However I use an Absolute Power as my benchmark ball. I think it is very versatile and reads the lanes quite well

Laybzz74 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 07, 2006, 08:32:59 AM »

My 2 cents here ...

With the addition of the Black Pearl to my current "L/LM" arsenal, I have what I believe to be TWO benchmark balls now ... my Big Bang(4K abralon & polished) and the Black Pearl (OOB); I still have my NS and could use that for the job as well.
--------------------
Man, I LOVE this game; and I love it even more now that I'm using LEGENDS/LaneMasters equipment !!!
"Master the Lanes with Legendary hitting power" !!!

Robb in O'Fallon, IL 62269 (near Scott AFB)
LAYBZZ74@AOL.COM (Email and PayPal addy)

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 07, 2006, 08:45:30 AM »

I think you bypassed what could be considered as Visionary's TRUE benchmark. It is the Frankie May Gryphon. IT has the solid cover of the Immortal with a lower flaring core. It has also been considered as one of the most versatile balls on the market. I have one and love it. You can drill it for a variety of roll/reactions and the cover takes to adjustments very well. A Canadian by the name of Michael Schmidt was throwing one on tv this past week during the World Cup. Get one if you can.
--------------------
Steven Vance
Former Pro Shop Operator

If anyone out there is worried about the scores being too high, try duckpin!!

golfnutFL · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2006, 04:38:32 PM »

quote:
I think you bypassed what could be considered as Visionary's TRUE benchmark. It is the Frankie May Gryphon. IT has the solid cover of the Immortal with a lower flaring core. It has also been considered as one of the most versatile balls on the market. I have one and love it. You can drill it for a variety of roll/reactions and the cover takes to adjustments very well. A Canadian by the name of Michael Schmidt was throwing one on tv this past week during the World Cup. Get one if you can.

Thanks for your thoughts, I hadn't considered the FMG. Maybe if I don't find what I'm looking for with the Black Pearl or the Immortal Solid I will give it a try.
--------------------
Don't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.

charlest · « **Reply #5 on:** October 07, 2006, 05:07:35 PM »

FWIW I think balls like the Black Pearl and the Frankie May are, as they come out of the box, far too strong to be a true benchmark ball. Although you can call any ball a benchmark ball, usually
- it is one that handles medium oil (not too much and not too light),
- it doesn't skid too far, nor roll too early;
- it is not a skid/flip type of ball;
- it does not have a huge backend;
- it is an arc-y type of ball;
- it can be a solid resin, usually lightly polished (or compound polish).

These days many pearl resins are strong enough to handle true medium oil, but too often they have a skid/flip type of reaction that while, it makes them great bowling balls, it can make their reaction hard to allow the bowler to get a good read from them.

Of the Lanemasters balls, the Absolute Power is probably their closest example to a true benchmark balls. Unless you give it a high polish or drill it very weak or very flippy, it has an arc-ing type of ball reaction and it handles true medium oil very well for the average "handed" bowler.

The Frankie May has the potential to be a benchmark ball but not with its stock surface of 400 grit and any normal drilling. I think you need to take it down to 1200 or 1500 grit to allow it to handle true medium oil (UNLESS you have very high ball speed, as compared to your rev rate.)

The Original Blue Warlock or the Charcoal Executioner were probably closer to being benchmark balls. Maybe the solid resin Centaur might be closest, with its stock surface; it might also need a finer surface,like 1200 or 1500 grit.

--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

scotts33 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 08, 2006, 10:11:32 AM »

I'd agree with charlest on how to establish what a mfg. benchmark ball is and is not.

quote:
- it is one that handles medium oil (not too much and not too light),
- it doesn't skid too far, nor roll too early;
- it is not a skid/flip type of ball;
- it does not have a huge backend;
- it is an arc-y type of ball;
- it can be a solid resin, usually lightly polished (or compound polish).

Agree completely.

I don't know enough about L/LM balls to give any suggestions. For Visionary that I do know a bit about I'd say it's a Violet Gargoyle. I believe the FM is too strong. The Charcoal Ex would be but it is not in their current line-up. Vis. has gone to all stronger balls.

golfnutFL--To give you an idea of what I use as my benchmark ball....I use a Radar with pin under ring 60 deg. layout. Even though I typically would choose a solid reactive cover for a benchmark ball the Radar with it's pearlized cover performs well in showing the lane condtion. Doesn't over react is archy and doesn't over power the condition. I also believe a benchmark ball needs to be laid out basically to give you the tenants that charlest said in his post.

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

charlest · « **Reply #7 on:** October 08, 2006, 12:59:51 PM »

Oddly, Scott, I also have the Radar. I didn't mention it because golfnut wasn't talking all possible benchmarks.

I agree 110%: ther Radar even though it's a pearl IS a definitive benchmark ball. Mine is drilled about 5x4, pin over ring finger, CG below, no weight hole. It is as smooth a pearl as they come without being particle and it handles true medium oil

FYI my Bruiser is also a benchmark ball. The Quantum mushrooms cores "softens" the polished PK solid cover just enough to arc and allow it to play the mediums.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Laybzz74 · « **Reply #8 on:** October 08, 2006, 07:01:10 PM »

Charlest,
Your previous thread on this subject in this post is SWEET !!! ALL the roomies should read and understand what you stated there as it seems to exemplify what a true "benchmark" ball is ... and what it isn't !!!
Great job, great info, and much appreciated !!!
--------------------
Man, I LOVE this game; and I love it even more now that I'm using LEGENDS/LaneMasters equipment !!!
"Master the Lanes with Legendary hitting power" !!!

Robb in O'Fallon, IL 62269 (near Scott AFB)
LAYBZZ74@AOL.COM (Email and PayPal addy)

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 08, 2006, 07:37:36 PM »

Charlest,

I agree with you as far as what the FM is like OOB. However, a benchmark, in my opinion, does not necessarily have to be OOB. If you take the FM and put it at 1000 abralon, it does everything you mentioned as characteristics of a benchmark ball. It handles mediums very well. It is a solid reactive. It does not roll too early. It reads the midlane very well and has more of a strong, archy, continuous backend. What everyone here needs to understand, is that lane conditions are not the same all over the world. The FM, for me on our fresh conditions, is everything you mentioned in a true benchmark and I have a pretty high rev rate. Just to give you an idea to my layout...it is pin 4 1/4 and the cg is stacked with a small weight hole and the cover is at 1000.

I dont disagree with you in what you are saying. I am just saying that the FM, from my experience, can be the benchmark that people like. For what it is worth, I have read others come on these forums and said that after a tweak in the cover, the ball had become their benchmark (whether a Brunswick, Storm, Track, or any other company).
--------------------
Steven Vance
Former Pro Shop Operator

If anyone out there is worried about the scores being too high, try duckpin!!

charlest · « **Reply #10 on:** October 08, 2006, 08:05:55 PM »

quote:
Charlest,

I agree with you as far as what the FM is like OOB. However, a benchmark, in my opinion, does not necessarily have to be OOB. If you take the FM and put it at 1000 abralon, it does everything you mentioned as characteristics of a benchmark ball. It handles mediums very well.

Oh,no, Steve, of course not. I thought I had stated that. (Just re-read what I wrote; I did.)
The Frankie May has the potential to be a benchmark ball but not with its stock surface of 400 grit and any normal drilling. I think you need to take it down to 1200 or 1500 grit to allow it to handle true medium oil (UNLESS you have very high ball speed, as compared to your rev rate.)

There are lots of potential benchmark balls, if you put the right drill and modify the surface for your release. I didn't start going into all potential candidates, because we could be here all night and my brain would turn to mush. I was trying to cover some stock balls because when people talk about a ball's reaction, they rarely talk about what happens with combinations of drills + surface adjustments. They talk about the basic ball.

PLUS although you mentioned that the FM is versatile and I agree, it is, I did understand that you were saying the same thing I was: it can be a benchmark ball (for the average bowler) with surface changes. Apologies for the misunderstanding

quote:

It is a solid reactive. It does not roll too early. It reads the midlane very well and has more of a strong, archy, continuous backend. What everyone here needs to understand, is that lane conditions are not the same all over the world. The FM, for me on our fresh conditions, is everything you mentioned in a true benchmark and I have a pretty high rev rate. Just to give you an idea to my layout...it is pin 4 1/4 and the cg is stacked with a small weight hole and the cover is at 1000.

I dont disagree with you in what you are saying. I am just saying that the FM, from my experience, can be the benchmark that people like. For what it is worth, I have read others come on these forums and said that after a tweak in the cover, the ball had become their benchmark (whether a Brunswick, Storm, Track, or any other company).
--------------------
Steven Vance

I agree with all the above, if it's not to late to mend fences ...
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Edited on 10/8/2006 7:59 PM

golfnutFL · « **Reply #11 on:** October 08, 2006, 08:26:29 PM »

quote:
FWIW I think balls like the Black Pearl and the Frankie May are, as they come out of the box, far too strong to be a true benchmark ball. Although you can call any ball a benchmark ball, usually
- it is one that handles medium oil (not too much and not too light),
- it doesn't skid too far, nor roll too early;
- it is not a skid/flip type of ball;
- it does not have a huge backend;
- it is an arc-y type of ball;
- it can be a solid resin, usually lightly polished (or compound polish).

These days many pearl resins are strong enough to handle true medium oil, but too often they have a skid/flip type of reaction that while, it makes them great bowling balls, it can make their reaction hard to allow the bowler to get a good read from them.

Of the Lanemasters balls, the Absolute Power is probably their closest example to a true benchmark balls. Unless you give it a high polish or drill it very weak or very flippy, it has an arc-ing type of ball reaction and it handles true medium oil very well for the average "handed" bowler.

The Frankie May has the potential to be a benchmark ball but not with its stock surface of 400 grit and any normal drilling. I think you need to take it down to 1200 or 1500 grit to allow it to handle true medium oil (UNLESS you have very high ball speed, as compared to your rev rate.)

The Original Blue Warlock or the Charcoal Executioner were probably closer to being benchmark balls. Maybe the solid resin Centaur might be closest, with its stock surface; it might also need a finer surface,like 1200 or 1500 grit.

charlest,
thanks for the insightful reply, your points are all valid and coincide with my definition of a true "benchmark" ball.

As I've transitioned my arsenal over the past few months I've discovered that I do lack that reliable "lane reader". Your points describe very well how my previous 2 benchmarks reacted, I probably have never been more comfortable reading a lane than I was with my Ace last season. It was the only ball I kept in my bag for the entire season. The Hybrid Dirty Bomb was also a very effective benchmark for me. Though it was a solid reactive and the Ace a particle pearl their reaction and shot shape was VERY similar for me. They overlapped and I preferred the fit (to my hand) of the Ace better.

So in my quest to reshape my arsenal (to L/LM and Visionary as previously explained) I've collected a bunch of great balls but not the one that fits charlest's apt definition.

I will see soon if the Immortal Solid or the Black Pearl can fill that void. I appreciate scotts33's and charlest's mention of the Radar, though I am going to try to find what I am looking for from L/LM or Visionary for now. I will also strongly consider the AP if my 2 new acquisitions fail to fill the role I'm hoping that at least one of them will.

Thanks to all who took the time to respond. Any other thoughts or ideas in the context of what I'm looking for would still be welcomed.
--------------------
Don't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.

Author Topic: Benchmark ball (Read 2455 times)

golfnutFL

Benchmark ball

stringer

Re: Benchmark ball

Laybzz74

Re: Benchmark ball

TWOHAND834

Re: Benchmark ball

golfnutFL

Re: Benchmark ball

charlest

Re: Benchmark ball

scotts33

Re: Benchmark ball

charlest

Re: Benchmark ball

Laybzz74

Re: Benchmark ball

TWOHAND834

Re: Benchmark ball

charlest

Re: Benchmark ball

golfnutFL

Re: Benchmark ball