Author Topic: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2 (Read 18249 times)

BrunsNick · « **on:** April 08, 2007, 08:57:29 PM »

Amending Brunswick's conclusive data of CG irrelevancy for ball reaction & track flare, using Lane #1 Equipment.

Video debuting 04.16.07
edit: 04.18.07 is the new date
--------------------
Nick Smith ... A.K.A. Les Badderâ„¢
Brunswick -=- PBA 03-07
http://www.BrunsNick.com
http://www.BigBapparel.com
Â¡Viva la naciÃ³n de Brunswick!

Edited on 4/9/2007 4:57 AM

Edited on 4/9/2007 8:43 PM

Edited on 4/13/2007 4:17 PM

RealBowler · « **Reply #46 on:** April 10, 2007, 11:17:42 PM »

If static weights don't matter, why do people complain about long ("pro") pins, and low or high top weights?

The thing nobody has mentioned is that by keeping the pin in a stationary position - say 4" from PAP - and moving the CG around, you are shifting the orientation of the core inside the ball.

That might not matter if the core was a circle, but that doesn't happen!

So, if you shift the core around, how can that not have any effect on the balls reaction?

http://www.bowlingfans.com/jeff/ballreactionbasics.html
--------------------
Haywood

**************************
I don't need a stupid
signature. This is enough.
**************************

Edited on 4/10/2007 11:20 PM

T-GOD · « **Reply #47 on:** April 10, 2007, 11:27:01 PM »

quote:
nd300, if you need further reference without the variable of human error, see this video.

We can all see that every ball went higher and higher in the pocket as the lanes dried out after each shot.

But, on the last shot, with negative side, the ball laid off a bit and stayed in the pocket instead of going high. How do you explain that..? =:^D

BrunsNick · « **Reply #48 on:** April 11, 2007, 02:00:56 AM »

I dunno Tom, you tell us.

There are obviously a lot of variables in this video. One could infer that because the negative balls were thrown twice in a row early, they picked up more oil on the shell causing them to create length later in the shots. You must have missed the CATS graph plot averaging out the 2 balls for the 8 shots. Do that for 20 shots, and they'd still be right on top of eachother.

In a world where I can't read and you can't see, its no wonder we can't see eye to eye.
--------------------
Nick Smith ... A.K.A. Les Badderâ„¢
Brunswick -=- PBA 03-07
http://www.BrunsNick.com
http://www.BigBapparel.com
Â¡Viva la naciÃ³n de Brunswick!

T-GOD · « **Reply #49 on:** April 11, 2007, 08:48:21 AM »

Nick, I don't care about cats graph or computer numbers. I care about what my eyes see as far as how the ball reacts down the lane and/or goes through the pins.

If you strike a certain way, leave a flat 10, a ringing 10, 4 pin, solid 8, or what ever, the pins tell me what the ball is doing.

quote:
You must have missed the CATS graph plot averaging out the 2 balls for the 8 shots. Do that for 20 shots, and they'd still be right on top of each other.

Yeah, you can hit your mark 10 times in a row too, and hit the pocket 10 times in a row. But, does that mean you're going to strike 10 times..? No, you can strike 5 times and leave 5 10 pins and still have the graphs right on top of each other.

So, the point you're trying to make is..? =:^D

Edited on 4/11/2007 9:31 AM

laufaye · « **Reply #50 on:** April 11, 2007, 09:11:00 AM »

quote:
Nick, I don't care about cats graph or computer numbers. I care about what my eyes see as far as how the ball reacts down the lane and/or goes through the pins.

If you strike a certain way, leave a flat 10, a ringing 10, 4 pin, solid 8, or what ever, the pins tell me what the ball is doing. =:^D

T-God,

Totally agreed with you, you have to trust what you see. But I saw the CATS data too, I cannot just ignore what I saw. No disrespect on ones believe, however there is no point to debate or discuss base on believing.

--------------------
Laufaye

Eddie M · « **Reply #51 on:** April 11, 2007, 09:38:26 AM »

quote:
No disrespect on ones believe, however there is no point to debate or discuss base on believing.

Try telling that to the any really religious person.

RealBowler · « **Reply #52 on:** April 11, 2007, 09:51:22 AM »

quote:
quote:
If static weights don't matter, why do people complain about long ("pro") pins, and low or high top weights?

The thing nobody has mentioned is that by keeping the pin in a stationary position - say 4" from PAP - and moving the CG around, you are shifting the orientation of the core inside the ball.

That might not matter if the core was a circle, but that doesn't happen!

So, if you shift the core around, how can that not have any effect on the balls reaction?

This test will be done with a symmetric core. That's why cgnomaddah.

You are still changing the orientation of the core. Symmetric or not, the core is going to in a different position. If a ball rolls/revs until it reaches its stabilization point, the position of the core is going to affect the way the reaction of the ball.

You can't just say that CG doesn't matter - you might be able to say that statics (ending weights) don't matter - but the pin and CG give you a reference to the way the core is situated in the ball. You really need a clear ball with a core to be able to visualize this.
--------------------
Haywood

**************************
I don't need a stupid
signature. This is enough.
**************************

Strapper_Squared · « **Reply #53 on:** April 11, 2007, 10:08:10 AM »

quote:

You are still changing the orientation of the core. Symmetric or not, the core is going to in a different position.

See the CAD demo in the Brunswick video. You are rotating the core about the pin (i.e. the top of a symmetric core). Thats the same as screwing a light bulb into a socket...doesn't change the orientation.

S^2
--------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Thank You... Only a Year Late!

I was shocked! says Theismann

laufaye · « **Reply #54 on:** April 11, 2007, 11:09:45 AM »

quote:
quote:

You are still changing the orientation of the core. Symmetric or not, the core is going to in a different position.

See the CAD demo in the Brunswick video. You are rotating the core about the pin (i.e. the top of a symmetric core). Thats the same as screwing a light bulb into a socket...doesn't change the orientation.

S^2
--------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Thank You... Only a Year Late!

I was shocked! says Theismann

Well on a side note, the video is showing a true or close to true symmetrical core. There should be a core orientation difference on a non-symmertical shape core but dynamic symmetrical core, meaning the differential between the Y-axis and the Z-axis are very little or not noticable, and manufacturer still market them as symmetrical core, or some manufacturer market them as LMB core.

In this case core orientation could be a factor, really depends on where we going to put the holes, including the X-hole if called for. And there are no info from any manufacturer to actually pin point the core orientation.
--------------------
Laufaye

T-GOD · « **Reply #55 on:** April 11, 2007, 01:40:55 PM »

If the core is off 1/8", it sure doesn't sound like much. But when you put it into motion with 300 rpm's or whatever, it will certainly throw it out of balance and start to wobble.

Imagine if you put a 1/8" spacer on one of the mounting pins before you put on the wheel. How much wobble would you feel going down the road..? That's no different then having the core of a ball off center by 1/8". =:^D

BrunsNick · « **Reply #56 on:** April 11, 2007, 02:09:06 PM »

LOL
--------------------
Nick Smith ... A.K.A. Les Badderâ„¢
Brunswick -=- PBA 03-07
http://www.BrunsNick.com
http://www.BigBapparel.com
Â¡Viva la naciÃ³n de Brunswick!

imjouster · « **Reply #57 on:** April 13, 2007, 03:32:53 AM »

I still want to know what would happen if you took a ball with like 2 oz side weight and a ball with 0 oz side weight and rolled em side by side. It would be essentially rolling 2 balls, one stacked vs. one Label. And of course leave the pins in the same spot. According to all this CG nomaddah crap then they should react the EXACT same. Yet almost everyone I know says that a stacked position will cause the ball to go longer and snap harder where as a label drill will cause the ball to have more of an even arc. That would go right together with my thought that the more sideweight you have the longer the ball will roll. There needs to be about a half oz. difference in order for the human eye to notice a difference. If you drill the balls up with 2 oz. negative and 2 oz. positive then you can say that there is 4 oz. difference. But as far as I'm concerned it really doesn't matter which side has the extra weight. If you take one ball that has 1 oz negative and roll it against a ball that is 0, then the negative ball will roll longer. Same thing with a ball with positive vs. 0.

I have had instances where I have drilled weight holes that didn't even come close to the core and I noticed a change in reaction. I have done it twice, both times taking about about 1/2 oz of sideweight. and both times the balls started reading a little earlier (I'd say 2-3 feet earlier). These 2 bowling balls were completely different from one another. One was a green gargoyle with Pin under bridge (no sideweight), and the other was an original inferno drilled stacked leverage with pin to the right of the fingers, with 1 1/4 oz sideweight.

I can only speak from experience, I have absolutely no proof to my theory other than what I have witnessed, and I do see some problems with my theory that I can't seem to work out. But I still want to see a ball with 0 side weight vs. one with pos. and one with neg.

Jeremy
--------------------
"Strive to be perfect, that is afterall the only way to become perfect."

"If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain and bitter;
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans."

Taken from Desiderata

Proud user of Columbia 300 and Visionary Bowling Products

T-GOD · « **Reply #58 on:** April 13, 2007, 09:06:57 AM »

jouster, any reasonably intellegent person like yourself, knows that what you're saying is true, based on the laws of physics.

Also, any reasonably intellegent person knows that statics, pin placement, CG placement and core shape don't matter if the surface isn't grabbing the lane. I've yet to see a ball hook on ice with any pin placement, core shape or CG position.

Therefore, because the plot of the graph would all be the same when throwing a ball on ice, nothing matters..!! It's that simple. =:^D

C-G ProShop-Carl · « **Reply #59 on:** April 13, 2007, 11:20:31 AM »

I enjoyed watching the video.

I do have one question....is it me or does the positive side weighted ball appear to have a lesser grit on the surface?

What is Brunswick's stand on axis hole placement in relation to ball reaction?

I am not jumping in on a debate, I am asking questions.....

-Carl
--------------------
Carl Hurd
C-G Pro Shop (owner/operator)
Youngstown Ohio

Tag Team Member #1

TAG TEAM COACHING!!!!!!/Co-Founder

Strapper_Squared · « **Reply #60 on:** April 13, 2007, 11:30:06 AM »

quote:

What is Brunswick's stand on axis hole placement in relation to ball reaction?

See nick's x-hole video...

EDIT:

Nick,

I think you should black-out (or purple-out for the HRG's) the labels and make the video, throwing the balls in a random order. Post the video here without telling anyone the results and let the so-called "experts," who can tell the difference between balls with negative and positive static weights, identify which shots belong to which balls.... but then again, statistically, my five year old neice should guess 50%, given two choices.

S^2

--------------------
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Thank You... Only a Year Late!

I was shocked! says Theismann

Edited on 4/13/2007 11:40 AM

Author Topic: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2 (Read 18249 times)

BrunsNick

CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

RealBowler

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

T-GOD

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

BrunsNick

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

T-GOD

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

laufaye

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

Eddie M

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

RealBowler

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

Strapper_Squared

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

laufaye

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

T-GOD

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

BrunsNick

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

imjouster

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

T-GOD

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

C-G ProShop-Carl

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

Strapper_Squared

Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2

Author Topic: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2* (Read 18249 times)

Author Topic: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO Pic Page 2 (Read 18249 times)