Author Topic: AMF vs 900 Global covers (Read 2854 times)

J_w73 · « **on:** December 27, 2009, 03:21:15 PM »

Are the 900 global S and AMF F cover rating numbers equal between the two companies??

Is S75 and F75 the same cover strength?
--------------------
16-17 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, HighGame 300 x 3, High Series 808
Book Average 205,PBA Xperience ave180

Jay · « **Reply #1 on:** December 28, 2009, 12:30:07 AM »

I asked Eric Thomas this question, and I'm pretty sure his answer was yes.
--------------------
Justin
Bowling Boards

polaris1050 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 28, 2009, 07:57:38 AM »

they are the same, but I have a hard time believing the F55 rating on the Clutch. It appears to be much stronger than that. Every one I have seen has been a hook monster.

stormed1 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 28, 2009, 08:20:07 AM »

quote:
they are the same, but I have a hard time believing the F55 rating on the Clutch. It appears to be much stronger than that. Every one I have seen has been a hook monster.

I agree totally. Will be throwing my Clutch for the first time tonight. Maniac is 450 and even at 3k plus polish its a monster!
--------------------
Arsenal: Mega Friction, S-75, Break Point x 2, Break x2,Clutch x 2,Maniac,Awakening,Lunatic,SX-1,Link,Hype urethane,Global Globe, 14# golden globe

http://s485.photobucket.com/albums/rr220/stormed1/My%20Arsenal/
Bowlingboards.com

Juggernaut · « **Reply #4 on:** December 28, 2009, 08:32:20 AM »

I wonder if there is a difference from pearl to solid covers? the reason I ask is because my F45 VILLAIN seems to be just as strong as my F65 CODE at times.

Everybody I''ve talked to has been surprised/impressed with the F55 CLUTCH''s hooking ability. Guess I need to get one for oily conditions.

--------------------
Good transactions list in my profile

[THIS SPACE FOR RENT]

Edited on 12/28/2009 9:33 AM

J_w73 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 28, 2009, 08:47:59 AM »

quote:
I wonder if there is a difference from pearl to solid covers? the reason I ask is because my F45 VILLAIN seems to be just as strong as my F65 CODE at times.

Everybody I''ve talked to has been surprised/impressed with the F55 CLUTCH''s hooking ability. Guess I need to get one for oily conditions.
--------------------
Good transactions list in my profile

[THIS SPACE FOR RENT]

Edited on 12/28/2009 9:33 AM

I think that is where matching the condition to the ball comes in. I have had conditions where my roto neptune will out hook and cover more boards than anything else I have. Sometimes weaker will hook more than stronger covers if there is oil up front and a clean dry to hook off of..
--------------------
16-17 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, HighGame 300 x 4, High Series 808
Book Average 205,PBA Xperience ave180

stormed1 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 28, 2009, 09:32:13 AM »

Going to try and throw a couple games with my Clutch and urethane Hype tonight (2nd and 3rd game in 6 months) as dr will be doing another graft on my foot thurs. By the way for the guys that said you could'nt polish a Hpe on a spinner - pics of mine are in the link in my signature
--------------------
Arsenal: Mega Friction, S-75, Break Point x 2, Break x2,Clutch x 2,Maniac,Awakening,Lunatic,SX-1,Link,Hype urethane,Global Globe, 14# golden globe

http://s485.photobucket.com/albums/rr220/stormed1/My%20Arsenal/
Bowlingboards.com

leftyinsnellville · « **Reply #7 on:** December 28, 2009, 10:06:28 AM »

Their ratings are pretty dead on, if you compare solid to solid, pearl to pearl, and hybrid to hybrid.

It's not surprising that many have found the Maniac, Clutch, and Lunatic to be "stronger" than expected. Most of us bowl on conditions that are well-suited for those balls. Most of my "hook-out-of-the-house" balls were not designed for heavy-oil.

I bought the Mega-Friction and the Bounty and both of them were pretty much useless. Not that they weren't good balls, it's just that I never saw enough oil to make 'em shine. I'm learning that it's a good idea to keep this in mind when I'm tempted to buy the next Hook Monster.
--------------------
I wanna be a house hack when I grow up.

http://averagebowlersballreviews.com/

Jay · « **Reply #8 on:** December 28, 2009, 11:26:08 PM »

I agree with lefty when comparing the balls. Gotta compare the same cover type I think. However, I don't think the ratings are completely spot on either. At least with the Clutch, which sounds like it's as strong as the Break series or N-Code.
--------------------
Justin
Bowling Boards

qstick777 · « **Reply #9 on:** December 29, 2009, 02:18:17 PM »

Some excerpts from the bowlingchat.net that Eric did a few months back:

quote:
Second, are the coverstock rating systems the same, other than the ''''S'''' for 900G and ''''F'''' for AMF? For example, are the coverstock strengths of the Lunatic(S53) and Clutch(F55) very similar, although I''''m sure they provide different reaction shapes?

[ETGLOBAL] 9:36 pm: Yes and Yes.

[ETGLOBAL] 9:36 pm: Our staffers are allowed to use both AMF and Global at all times....We want them to! We want them to use any product that can help them win

[ETGLOBAL] 9:37 pm: The cover ratings are the same. S for Global and F for AMF. but both the same

[ETGLOBAL] 9:37 pm: Lunatic and Clutch are close but have different shapes and can handle different conditions but again the core numbers are close so it drew the 2 closer in the long run

and

quote:

[Amateur] 9:39 pm: I was wondering if there''''s an easier way to determine the strength of your pearls realative to the other balls, at least as far as covers go

[Amateur] 9:40 pm: For example, Break Point Pearl is S73, but so is the Solid

[ETGLOBAL] 9:40 pm: ahhh ok.

[Amateur] 9:41 pm: Like, is there a reasonable amount of strength we can take away from the number in our heads to better understand where it really fits, such as S10 less?

[ETGLOBAL] 9:41 pm: Well the core we added a flip block but the cover was pearlized. We didnt feel that it could handle more oil than the solid so we didnt want to rate it higher. But again we felt that it could hold its own. So we gave it the same rating.....In essence its the same cover just pearlized. So you can expect a cleaner front with a little more flip off the spot

[ETGLOBAL] 9:42 pm: S10 is the weakest.....S100 would be the strongest.

[ETGLOBAL] 9:42 pm: We also want you to keep in mind that just because it has the same number that doesnt mean its the exact same cover....

[ETGLOBAL] 9:43 pm: We could come out with another S75 but that doesnt mean that it will have soaker in it....make sense?

and

quote:

[Amateur] 9:45 pm: So it sounds like you guys take into account everything to determine the number(hook rating?)?

[ETGLOBAL] 9:45 pm: it could be yes.

[MegaMav] 9:45 pm: I will hold...

[qstick777] 9:46 pm: so its basically just a strength rating

[ETGLOBAL] 9:46 pm: Yes the number isnt something we pick out of the air.....I know at one point somebody said we just make the numbers higher to get you to keep buying.....not true at all

[ETGLOBAL] 9:46 pm: We take into account the core, cover and surface

[Amateur] 9:46 pm: Okay, I was just trying to figure out if the number was only based on coverstock or if it''''s an overall hook rating

[ETGLOBAL] 9:46 pm: Instead of coming up with marketing names that nobody can remember we opted for a simple numeric system

[ETGLOBAL] 9:47 pm: its a hodge podge

[qstick777] 9:47 pm: makes sense, but how much difference between 70, 73, 75, and 77?

[ETGLOBAL] 9:47 pm: not a ton.....but enough on given conditions.

--------------------
bowlingchat.net

"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."

Edited on 12/29/2009 3:22 PM

Edited on 12/29/2009 3:22 PM

global900pbaexp · « **Reply #10 on:** December 29, 2009, 02:30:30 PM »

I just bowled this weekend on a house shot that had a lot
of oil between the second and third arrow, all incusive.

I could thow my break point pearl from the second arrow
out to the third board and it worked OK.

But, I used a Mega Friction, drilled aggressive, straight down the
second arrow. It just kept rolling on down the lane. It was easy
to keep straight down the second arow with speed. I was killing
the lanes with it.

I have learned, just because it is an aggressive ball does not mean
you can just hook it out of the building. You need oil and then you
still need to hit a mark.

To me, what makes this ball great, is how it rolls in the oil and
then thru the pin deck. It has nothing to do with the amount
of hook but how it hooks and where it hooks and how it goes thru
the pins.

quote:
Their ratings are pretty dead on, if you compare solid to solid, pearl to pearl, and hybrid to hybrid.

It's not surprising that many have found the Maniac, Clutch, and Lunatic to be "stronger" than expected. Most of us bowl on conditions that are well-suited for those balls. Most of my "hook-out-of-the-house" balls were not designed for heavy-oil.

I bought the Mega-Friction and the Bounty and both of them were pretty much useless. Not that they weren't good balls, it's just that I never saw enough oil to make 'em shine. I'm learning that it's a good idea to keep this in mind when I'm tempted to buy the next Hook Monster.
--------------------
I wanna be a house hack when I grow up.

http://averagebowlersballreviews.com/

Author Topic: AMF vs 900 Global covers (Read 2854 times)

J_w73

AMF vs 900 Global covers

Jay

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

polaris1050

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

stormed1

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

Juggernaut

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

J_w73

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

stormed1

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

leftyinsnellville

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

Jay

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

qstick777

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers

global900pbaexp

Re: AMF vs 900 Global covers