Author Topic: Are Coverstocks Too Strong? (Read 4008 times)

n00dlejester · « **on:** August 13, 2009, 01:19:28 PM »

Alright, I pose this question as a generalization of bowling balls on the market today to the lane conditions 90% of bowlers see (THS and the occasional tighter tournament shot).

Most of the upper echelon of bowling balls are sick nasty strong. Most league bowlers that I hang out with get these, and end up hating them. Before long, most of these same bowlers wind up with a mid to "entry" level resin ball. Hy-Roads, the Mars, Rattlers/Pythons, the Avalanches are all pretty hot bowling balls and work well in most bowlers hands. These weaker balls generally have weaker covers - so thus my question, are coverstocks too strong? I would love to see a stronger core with a weaker cover...in fact, I'd love to see a NIB X-Factor and see how well it does on conditions today.

/ramblings of a bowler
--------------------
Proud Supporter of Rob Stone
Obviously, you aren''t a golfer.
Some stayed in the foothills, some washed logs like teeth.

JustRico · « **Reply #16 on:** August 14, 2009, 11:31:33 AM »

It is a give and take...as the oils or conditioners get thicker or higher in viscocity, the strength or absorption rate gets stronger. Also, ever since '99 or '00, additives are now in the oils, making them even thicker.
Lane surfaces are getting lower in friction or harder.

So when you say are covers stronger...they tend to have to be for the average bowler, if the bowl anywhere that may be putting out a higher volume of conditioner or bowl on newer generations of lane surfaces.

If we were still bowling on wood with urethane finishes...the ball would stop on the lane from burning out.

You can still take most of the newer balls with stronger covers and smoothing them up & adding polish and they would hydroplane down the lane.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

As posted by Steven..."None other than our esteemed JustRico!!"

Motiv Girl · « **Reply #17 on:** August 14, 2009, 11:53:51 AM »

This is the reason MOTIV made the SX1 and TX1 with covers with the didn't have
heavy oil absorption.The covers would last longer and you can get a better
read of the lanes.The GT1 had a little higher oil absorption cover.The TR2
has a higher oil absorption cover.Not every ball needs these oil sucker covers.
You can hook a ball without having max flare.Most house shots and some PBA patterns need less not more.I have used my SX1 and TX1 with great success on
these house shots.At the USBC queens I used 3 SX1's and qualified 41rst.The only
thing I did was adjust the cover surface.Who wants a dead 200.00 plus ball
after 50 games.
--------------------
MOTIV GIRL

stopncrank · « **Reply #18 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:10:19 PM »

for a typical house shot, yes. i havent used an upper end ball for three games in a league in ten years at least. most times in league i end up throwing my trusty angle evolution pearl with about 500 games on it lol. the stronger balls do have their place though, like last week when i encountered a 54 ft flat pattern at a local tournament. the virtual gravity was sweet then. i second the notion of a company wrapping a mild cover around a strong core, i would love to see storm bring back the old curelyon covers with updated cores. i also second the skid snap comment, that look is getting harder to find every day. i cant tell you how mant people i watch in league trying to make a 200 dollar ball work when they could have just bought a mars or a tropical and scored well with it all 3 games. i understand pro shops need to make money, but sometimes they need to do a better job of selling the right ball for each person. so anyways my answer is yes, coverstocks are too strong today, for leagues anyways.
--------------------
STORM:If You Hear The Thunder,Sorry,The Lightning's Already Struck!

JustRico · « **Reply #19 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:18:09 PM »

Good point, where there is friction, the differences in bowling balls is less. Most balls all respond to friction similar...it is the presence of conditioner and carrydown where the differences are evident. House shots are the WORST condition to see any differences in bowling balls...they can all look the same.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

As posted by Steven..."None other than our esteemed JustRico!!"

OddBalls · « **Reply #20 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:24:50 PM »

My take?

Houses are putting out less and less oil do to costs.

The centers that I bowl in USE to be known for heavier oils and I was using my UI about 90% of the time as little as two years ago. Now, I end up using my Avalanches 90% of the time and haveto go with my Purple Rhino Pro when they are too much..

My S75? Use it once for A game and had to put it away
--------------------
Yes. it's I, the Inverted One..

Motiv Girl · « **Reply #21 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:28:09 PM »

When doing my ball review for the TR2 I threw the ball over 50 games with one TR2
and I did not notice any difference in reaction.The ball was used on the shark
pattern in my summer league and this ball is very strong. Bowling this Month
confirmed this."The overall hook potential of the TR2 is best suited for heavily
oiled lanes.The factory 800- grit finish allows this ball to cut through the thickest of oils."Also Bowlers Journal stated."The TR2is most definitely a condition-specific( heavy oil) ball,but it is very good at what it was designed for."
--------------------
MOTIV GIRL

OddBalls · « **Reply #22 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:30:54 PM »

quote:
When doing my ball review for the TR2 I threw the ball over 50 games with one TR2
and I did not notice any difference in reaction.The ball was used on the shark
pattern in my summer league and this ball is very strong. Bowling this Month
confirmed this."The overall hook potential of the TR2 is best suited for heavily
oiled lanes.The factory 800- grit finish allows this ball to cut through the thickest of oils."Also Bowlers Journal stated."The TR2is most definitely a condition-specific( heavy oil) ball,but it is very good at what it was designed for."
--------------------
MOTIV GIRL

That still wont stop people from buying it and throwing it on conditions it's not meant for then bashing it for not hooking at all..

Just watch..
--------------------
Yes. it's I, the Inverted One..

JustRico · « **Reply #23 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:33:39 PM »

When TRUE ball tests are done or comparing bowling balls, they are done on a multitude of lane conditions, as well as by MORE than ONE bowler or bowler type, along with a qualified 'observer'.
A bowler having an opinion on ball reaction, is not a true moniker of what a bowling ball does.
And just curious...has either BTM or BJ EVER had a bad ball review?
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

As posted by Steven..."None other than our esteemed JustRico!!"

Edited on 8/14/2009 12:34 PM

Motiv Girl · « **Reply #24 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:38:12 PM »

I do agree.People will buy what they want no matter what.And yes,BJ & BTM has had
some bad ball reviews.
--------------------
MOTIV GIRL

JustRico · « **Reply #25 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:39:10 PM »

Really...name them.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

As posted by Steven..."None other than our esteemed JustRico!!"

OddBalls · « **Reply #26 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:44:57 PM »

quote:
Really...name them.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

As posted by Steven..."None other than our esteemed JustRico!!"

Can't think of one...
--------------------
Yes. it's I, the Inverted One..

Motiv Girl · « **Reply #27 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:55:16 PM »

Not reviews that I thought was bad ,but some people I Know who have not agreed
with the reviews.I find them helpful.Not everyone will find every review
helpful or dead on.
--------------------
MOTIV GIRL

stopncrank · « **Reply #28 on:** August 14, 2009, 12:59:27 PM »

and all these videos of balls being thrown on house shots, lol i cant tell one manufacturer from the other, they all roll the same on a house shot. i dont even watch em anymore. dont read very mant reviews on here either they are all about the same. what ever happend to somebody getting excited about learning a new release, not buying the latest and greatest? with balls getting stronger by the week, usbc needs to look into lane widening next

.
--------------------
STORM:If You Hear The Thunder,Sorry,The Lightning's Already Struck!

Edited on 8/14/2009 1:00 PM

OddBalls · « **Reply #29 on:** August 14, 2009, 01:01:32 PM »

quote:
and all these videos of balls being thrown on house shots, lol i cant tell one manufacturer from the other, they all roll the same on a house shot. i dont even watch em anymore. what ever happend to somebody getting excited about learning a new release, not buying the latest and greatest? with balls getting stronger by the week, usbc needs to look into lane widening next.
--------------------
STORM:If You Hear The Thunder,Sorry,The Lightning's Already Struck!

Richie Spaz from Lane#1 already ask USBC to widen the lanes 5 boards for the Dynamo. Now the X2 is coming out, he wants them twice as wide..

--------------------
Yes. it's I, the Inverted One..

stopncrank · « **Reply #30 on:** August 14, 2009, 01:07:48 PM »

i wouldnt go that far! but the x2 is a beast beleive that!
--------------------
STORM:If You Hear The Thunder,Sorry,The Lightning's Already Struck!

Author Topic: Are Coverstocks Too Strong? (Read 4008 times)

n00dlejester

Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

JustRico

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

Motiv Girl

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

stopncrank

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

JustRico

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

OddBalls

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

Motiv Girl

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

OddBalls

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

JustRico

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

Motiv Girl

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

JustRico

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

OddBalls

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

Motiv Girl

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

stopncrank

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

OddBalls

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?

stopncrank

Re: Are Coverstocks Too Strong?