Author Topic: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool? (Read 2054 times)

jepr0x · « **on:** February 09, 2009, 11:36:19 AM »

From what I've learned, todays bowling balls have reactive as the base. Simple additives make it particle or pearls and no additive means its a solid.

I've always thought pearls consisted of a reactive base with an additive like mica to stiffen the surface which causes the ball to go longer.

Now it seems like more and more "hybrid" ball are coming out which claims two parts pearl one part solid or some other formula claiming to give the best of both worlds.

To me Hybrids are the same as any other pearl. Just depends on the quantity of "pearl additives" added.

Is it safe to assume that the "Hybrid" title is for the sole purpose of marketing to the consumers that it is the best of both worlds or is there more to it?

Dan Belcher · « **Reply #1 on:** February 09, 2009, 07:42:10 PM »

Take two colors, swirl them together. One of the colors is a pure solid resin, the other color has mica added to pearlize it. Once you have the two swirled together, approximately 50% of the time the ball will be tracking over the solid coverstock, while the other 50% of the time it will be tracking over the pearl coverstock. That's the idea behind a hybrid. For example, the Storm Hy-Road will give you an in-between reaction of what you would get with the T-Road Solid or the T-Road Pearl simply because it has the hybrid coverstock over the same core. It will handle more oil than the pearl, but get through the fronts cleaner and rev up harder downlane than the solid.

jepr0x · « **Reply #2 on:** February 09, 2009, 08:02:05 PM »

so any pearl can be considered a hybrid. Lets say they didnt come out with a hyroad. but came out with a t-road super pearl that had twice the amount of mica additive as the original. would that make it seem like the original t-road pearl is the hybrid. does that make sense? haha.

Is there a set amount of mica additives all the companies add to the ball to classify them as a pearl? or different companies do different amounts?

JustRico · « **Reply #3 on:** February 09, 2009, 08:07:54 PM »

Another way to look at it, with the strengths of todays additives, it lessens the effect of a solid or pearl appearance.

Think of it this way, why do we think a pearl responds better to lesser amounts of oil as opposed to a solid cover? Generally pearls are shiny and solids are dull. Shiny skids more dulls reacts more.

Outdated.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

Dan Belcher · « **Reply #4 on:** February 09, 2009, 08:18:56 PM »

quote:
Is there a set amount of mica additives all the companies add to the ball to classify them as a pearl? or different companies do different amounts?

They differ not only from company to company, but from ball to ball. The idea behind a hybrid coverstock is it gives you a very direct sense of exactly where the ball fits in the lineup. So in that sense, it is marketing. But what isn't?

DanH78 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 09, 2009, 08:32:24 PM »

quote:
Another way to look at it, with the strengths of todays additives, it lessens the effect of a solid or pearl appearance.

Think of it this way, why do we think a pearl responds better to lesser amounts of oil as opposed to a solid cover? Generally pearls are shiny and solids are dull. Shiny skids more dulls reacts more.

Outdated.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

So, two bowling balls, one with the solid version and one with the pearl version of the same coverstock, drilled the same, with same cover prep will react identical?
--------------------
It IS next year!

JustRico · « **Reply #6 on:** February 09, 2009, 08:47:03 PM »

On a majority of conditions for a majority of bowlers...YES. The difference is miniscule if not less. It is more aesthetic than reaction.

I know most, if not all, will call blasphemy, but it's not.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

Locke · « **Reply #7 on:** February 09, 2009, 09:41:42 PM »

Rico, usually I agree with your post but here I have to disagree. First, mica hardens the cover and also lessens the pours in the cover. That is why pearls soak up less oil. That is also why pearls are skid snap. A harder surface provides less contact with the lane because on the small scale it doesn't flex as much and there for less all surface less friction. This stores more energy for when the ball does get to dry, hence the snap.

As for hybrid covers, its not the amount of mica. Its the ratio between pearl and solid. If you look at a hybrid ball you will see that some of the cover is solid reactive and some is pearl. This allows for a "hybrid" reaction. Since it has some solid cover it will get more read and arc than a purely pearl ball and since it has some pearl it will clear better and get more angle than a purely solid ball. It really is the best of both worlds. Giving you a reaction somewhere in between. Honestly with the right drilling and surface prep you can probably make a pearl ball act like a hybrid if you put a fairly early roll drilling on it and rough it up a little, or you could do the opposite with a solid by polishing the living daylights out of it and putting a late drilling on it. What this does is allows you to just drill a ball to get that reaction instead of having to make all sorts of tweaks to get it.
--------------------
Always be sincere, even when you don't mean it

The Cell Pimp

JustRico · « **Reply #8 on:** February 09, 2009, 09:59:31 PM »

Mica is not as prevalent in pearls as they were in the 90's. In normal cover stocks, there is very little difference between a pearl & a solid additive and unless you have the opportunity of having the same ball with the differing covers, this is all perception or hypothetical.

Surface prep is what dictates length or skid, as well as how it responds to friction.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

DP3 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 09, 2009, 10:04:30 PM »

quote:

Surface prep is what dictates length or skid, as well as how it responds to friction.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

I was jumping at the gun to say this. You beat me to it a few minutes early.
--------------------
-DJ Marshall
...The Twelve In a Row Pro Shop. AMF Bowie Lanes -- Bowie, MD

DanH78 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 09, 2009, 10:22:28 PM »

quote:
On a majority of conditions for a majority of bowlers...YES. The difference is miniscule if not less. It is more aesthetic than reaction.

I know most, if not all, will call blasphemy, but it's not.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

So can the same thing be said for particle vs. non-particle versions of the same ball?
--------------------
It IS next year!

JessN16 · « **Reply #11 on:** February 09, 2009, 10:32:18 PM »

quote:
On a majority of conditions for a majority of bowlers...YES. The difference is miniscule if not less. It is more aesthetic than reaction.

I know most, if not all, will call blasphemy, but it's not.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

I'd agree with you going one way (sanding a pearl) but maybe not the other (high polish on a solid). I've had some high polishes on solids before and if they weren't already either old/oil-soaked or super-tame to begin with, I still can't replicate the reaction of a pearl with a high polish.

But I've taken some pearls and taken them down to 360 just for kicks and they look like oilers.

Jess

JustRico · « **Reply #12 on:** February 09, 2009, 10:40:41 PM »

Just keep in mind....unless you do a controlled test, it all conjecture and perception.

Many things go into ball reaction perception, much not truly qualified.

Unless you take a pearl and a solid with the same layout and the same surface prep, it is all perception.

How much does color lend itself to a perceived ball's reaction or motion? How much lighting in the bowling center lends itself to the same notions.

Understand what a controlled evaluation is and how to gauge perception and actuality.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

JessN16 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 09, 2009, 11:51:31 PM »

quote:
Just keep in mind....unless you do a controlled test, it all conjecture and perception.

Many things go into ball reaction perception, much not truly qualified.

Unless you take a pearl and a solid with the same layout and the same surface prep, it is all perception.

How much does color lend itself to a perceived ball's reaction or motion? How much lighting in the bowling center lends itself to the same notions.

Understand what a controlled evaluation is and how to gauge perception and actuality.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

True, but we're not lab rats. We're bowlers on an Internet forum, and we bowl under lights with different color balls, etc., etc., so putting real-world observations into practice -- even if they are playing on our subconscious in the process -- is all we have.

I have been fortunate to replicate at least some of those parameters given that I have my own drilling equipment and buying bowling balls is somewhat of a hobby (which my wife is completely thrilled by -- a totally different topic (g)).

Best example I can give you at the moment is that I have a Thunderstruck Solid and Thunderstruck Pearl, both drilled Rico. I had them surfaced equally for awhile (2000 plus polish). While very similar, I would not call them exact -- and I should also add that I wasn't consciously trying to replicate this test, so I had no biases there. In fact, the opposite might have been true: I was trying to get them the same so I could then adjust the Thunderstruck Solid back up and get the amount of differential between the two I was looking for.

Jess

Dan Belcher · « **Reply #14 on:** February 10, 2009, 06:05:58 AM »

I don't know about you guys, but I see a world of difference in a sanded pearl versus a sanded solid, even on the same type of ball... the pearl still gets through the front part of the lane cleaner and still reacts more violently to dry boards downlane. Whenever I bowl on a PBA Experience pattern, I keep at least one sanded pearl in my bag because it lets me play a deeper line than a solid without giving me too much skid and an over/under reaction. Take a Gravity Shift and a Virtual Gravity and put them at the same finish -- I bet you'll see a visible difference in ball reaction.

Author Topic: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool? (Read 2054 times)

jepr0x

"Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

Dan Belcher

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

jepr0x

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

JustRico

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

Dan Belcher

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

DanH78

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

JustRico

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

Locke

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

JustRico

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

DP3

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

DanH78

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

JessN16

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

JustRico

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

JessN16

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?

Dan Belcher

Re: "Hybrid" coverstock just a marketing tool?