BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: nocarey on November 03, 2014, 11:10:33 AM
-
here's an interesting article from Bowler's Mart and Jeff Ussery
http://www.bowlersmart.com/bowling-blog/industry-insider-by-jeff-ussery/cracked-bowling-balls-664 (http://www.bowlersmart.com/bowling-blog/industry-insider-by-jeff-ussery/cracked-bowling-balls-664)
-
I ain't buying it anymore. It's not the heat, cold, temperature fluctuations, cleaning method, pin drilled to close to finger hole, super glue etc, etc. Some balls crack, some don't.
Personally, I believe it's a manufacturing flaw within the shell of the ball that causes it 99% of the time. The ball companies all have a stake in us believing "it's OUR fault". No it isn't, it's a quality control issue in their process.
Of course, there is the occasional genius who "butterballs" a ball in the oven, but that results in a completely different crack pattern than a ball with a single crack all the way around.
Then again, I could be wrong. :o ;D ;D
-
I ain't buying it anymore. It's not the heat, cold, temperature fluctuations, cleaning method, pin drilled to close to finger hole, super glue etc, etc. Some balls crack, some don't.
Personally, I believe it's a manufacturing flaw within the shell of the ball that causes it 99% of the time. The ball companies all have a stake in us believing "it's OUR fault". No it isn't, it's a quality control issue in their process.
Of course, there is the occasional genius who "butterballs" a ball in the oven, but that results in a completely different crack pattern than a ball with a single crack all the way around.
Then again, I could be wrong. :o ;D ;D
I agree 100% except for un-beveled holes. They seem to crack much more often than not.
-
The 2 bballs that cracked on me had too much glue for the inserts and the bridge was less than 1/4. The holes were not beveled also....
Cav
-
While I believe that extreme temperature changes may be a factor in causing a ball to crack, that doesn't explain the many cases where balls have cracked while in homes or proshops. I had at least one that cracked while sitting in my locker at the bowling center.
-
I ain't buying it anymore. It's not the heat, cold, temperature fluctuations, cleaning method, pin drilled to close to finger hole, super glue etc, etc. Some balls crack, some don't.
Personally, I believe it's a manufacturing flaw within the shell of the ball that causes it 99% of the time. The ball companies all have a stake in us believing "it's OUR fault". No it isn't, it's a quality control issue in their process.
Of course, there is the occasional genius who "butterballs" a ball in the oven, but that results in a completely different crack pattern than a ball with a single crack all the way around.
Then again, I could be wrong. :o ;D ;D
Bingo, and a big +1….
I'm a ball whore, and I currently own 35+ balls across the EBI, Storm, and Motiv brands. I've probably owned 100+ over the past 10 years. Up until this year, I've only had one ball crack across all those balls. In the past few months, I've had three relatively new balls crack from the same company. The most recent cracked balls was a replacement for one of the other two cracked balls, and had less than 10 games on it when it happened. :o
There is no doubt in my mind it 's a flaw in manufacturing. I don't live in a cold climate, and I store all my equipment at room temperature.
I'm looking forward to hearing what the manufacturing Rep says when he sees the ball. If it's anything other that "We will replace the that ball too", I'll never buy from that company again.
-
The 2 bballs that cracked on me had too much glue for the inserts and the bridge was less than 1/4. The holes were not beveled also....
Cav
Narrow bridges and un-beveled holes make more sense as that creates a small pressure point, but the glue idea I don't accept. If it was the glue, then all balls(or at least a majority of them) where glue was used would crack.
-
I have to lean both ways on this one. I have had people bring balls in that were drilled elsewhere with narrow bridges cracked, pin 1/2 drilled out that the ball was cracked all the way around. Last year I had two balls crack on same day that were new undrilled sitting on my display wall next to each other and both different companies so I would say manufacture defect on those two. My shop is on an inside wall and is kept at 72 degrees. Think manufacture flaw and not following drilling guidelines definately increases cracking potential. Not everything is made perfect and by having the drilling guidelines is allows manufacturers a means to not replacing every cracked ball.
-
The type of crack dictates the flaw...surface cracks dictates temperature or coverstock flaw...the deep to the core type are from the cores not being allowed to cure thus creating cracks that push the cover away...1/16-1/8" cracks that's are wider at the top than the core
-
3 things kill a ball the most:
Temperature
Gravity/Pressure
Weak spots caused by drilling
-
But the LARGEST is the curing process...bowling balls are not allowed to cure properly as they were previously
-
3 things kill a ball the most:
Temperature
Gravity/Pressure
Weak spots caused by drilling
+1 on those
-
But the LARGEST is the curing process...bowling balls are not allowed to cure properly as they were previously
I believe that too
-
one temperature related problem might be when a used ball is plugged
some of that plug material is rather hot
-
Plug balls are not included in this conversation
-
Milo!!
I'm with you on this subject. I am just not buying it! I have just had three balls crack on me while sitting on my ball rack. Three of the four were from the same company, unfortunately. Two of the four were fairly new....(one to two years old) and only had a few games on them.
However......all of the cracks were huge voids stretching all the way around the ball or stretching from my thumbhole to my balance hole. No glue was involved in any of these cracks!!
I still own oldies but goodies from the nineties which have neither large voided cracks or cracks near the finger holes! This sounds to me like a manufacturing glitch or just the nature of these super-soft, highly aggressive covers that they make these days!
-
I wonder if an original LT-48 ever cracked? :o
-
I wonder if an original LT-48 ever cracked? :o
I don't know, but mine had that old "cork" type core that soaked in the humidity so much that I was always having to smooth up the thumb hole.
-
my guess is when the old rubber balls were new they didn't crack because they were softer than the plastic ones and not many used grips or slugs so no crazy glue was used
-
Just Rico...I have a question for you...Do you think we have a bigger problem
with shells cracking TODAY as compared to YESTERDAY...
It seems that in the OLD days the Shells were much thicker...3/4" to 1"...
Now it appears most are about 3/8" thick...
And in the old days the shells were not as porous...
Do you think this may be a reason for the cracking issues with today's ball..
Thank you
-
But the LARGEST is the curing process...bowling balls are not allowed to cure properly as they were previously
Could you please expand on this?
Has there been a change in the chemicals or procedure, or have they been rushed out the doors too soon, or???
-
i have a brunswick nexxus red and black one that i have less than 1 year.went to new york 5 days when i come back its cracked all around from the thumb not even near the pin.my driller contacted the distributor he got it from and because the ball was made 2 years ago they won't replace.i only had it 11 months.i will never buy another piece of crap made in mexico brunswick ball again.never had one cracked before.
-
It has nothing to do with where its made. If your driller can show that you purchased and drilled the ball and the ball cracked in a year from that time its covered.
I have two undrilled Ebonite balls crack. It wouldn't stop me from buying from them.
-
In my opinion, from what I know of manufacturing, anything made has a natural curing time...so if the time needed is shortened, that doesn't or wouldn't eliminate that necessity...so if the core is still 'changing' or curing and the cover is poured over a changing, 'live' object, something generally gives....thus any crack becomes a gap...the core is pushing the shell away or expands
I do not believe it has anything to do with the shell thickness or porosity of the covers...
-
In my opinion, from what I know of manufacturing, anything made has a natural curing time...so if the time needed is shortened, that doesn't or wouldn't eliminate that necessity...so if the core is still 'changing' or curing and the cover is poured over a changing, 'live' object, something generally gives....thus any crack becomes a gap...the core is pushing the shell away or expands
I do not believe it has anything to do with the shell thickness or porosity of the covers...
now that could be an article BTM may be interested in
-
Agreed nocarey
-
Not beveling holes creates a larger opportunity for the holes to chip on the edges, which can lead to cracks. The glue issue is when you use too much glue. It expands and contracts at a different rate than the ball does, so if somebody slobbers glue all over the place, you're going to have more of a problem, and they also tend to come out more often. I put a dab of glue on each side of the grips, and bevel every hole no matter what, and I've never had any problems.
Curing is and can be the predominant cause, but that doesn't invalidate what Jeff said. I know Jeff personally, have for a long time, and he knows his stuff. I don't believe he said temperature fluctuation was the sole cause of balls cracking. The customer has no control over the curing process, but they do have control over what they do with their equipment once they buy it. If you're keeping your equipment climate controlled, then obviously it's not your fault, but there are plenty of people out there who don't understand the concept, and given that it's the easiest and really the only thing you as a bowler can do to help prevent the problem, I think that's what this article was aimed at.
-
In my opinion, from what I know of manufacturing, anything made has a natural curing time...so if the time needed is shortened, that doesn't or wouldn't eliminate that necessity...so if the core is still 'changing' or curing and the cover is poured over a changing, 'live' object, something generally gives....thus any crack becomes a gap...the core is pushing the shell away or expands
I do not believe it has anything to do with the shell thickness or porosity of the covers...
Just Rico...Yesterday a customer came in with two old balls from the 90's..
A Piranha and a Beast...Neither one was cracked...And the shells on those balls were
much thicker...In that era most shells were 1 1/2" thick...Which became the reason
Thumb slugs became popular...
Today's shells are about 3/8" thick at best...and are more porous...
I don't ever recall having cracking issues with the balls from that era...
So IMO...I think it is possible that the thinner and more porous shells on today's balls
may indeed be a reason for all the cracking issues...
I find it rather ODD that all of a sudden...All the manufacturers are having curing issues...
Shells are about 20% as thick compared to balls of that era...That means boo koo
savings on material...
just my opinion...
I also have an opinion about Obama...oops...lol
-
Are you saying that Obama causes bowling balls to crack?? :o ;D
-
Cores are also larger on average. That and filler will lead to thinner shells as well.
-
More porosity in shells mean they should actually crack less since they are less dense and therefore more "flexible." As technology advances, you will see more performance and most likely more issues. Increased performance doesn't always mean increased durability, sometimes there's a tradeoff. And he didn't say they were having curing issues, he said they weren't allowing the cores and balls the time they need to properly cure. That's an issue with process, not material.
In my opinion, from what I know of manufacturing, anything made has a natural curing time...so if the time needed is shortened, that doesn't or wouldn't eliminate that necessity...so if the core is still 'changing' or curing and the cover is poured over a changing, 'live' object, something generally gives....thus any crack becomes a gap...the core is pushing the shell away or expands
I do not believe it has anything to do with the shell thickness or porosity of the covers...
Just Rico...Yesterday a customer came in with two old balls from the 90's..
A Piranha and a Beast...Neither one was cracked...And the shells on those balls were
much thicker...In that era most shells were 1 1/2" thick...Which became the reason
Thumb slugs became popular...
Today's shells are about 3/8" thick at best...and are more porous...
I don't ever recall having cracking issues with the balls from that era...
So IMO...I think it is possible that the thinner and more porous shells on today's balls
may indeed be a reason for all the cracking issues...
I find it rather ODD that all of a sudden...All the manufacturers are having curing issues...
Shells are about 20% as thick compared to balls of that era...That means boo koo
savings on material...
just my opinion...
I also have an opinion about Obama...oops...lol
-
Who here has had Hyroads crack? Those shells are SUPER thick.
-
Covers are thinner for 2 reasons. Filler is cheaper than cover and filler weighs less than cover.
You can make balls with thicker covers but you are generally limited in the RG's and differentials that can be achieved.
-
Just fill the cracks with plug material... good as new... ;) :o :P
-
Who here has had Hyroads crack? Those shells are SUPER thick.
I was thinking exactly the same thing Giz.
-
Although no HyRoad experience, I only use old Quantums and anyone that has been around knows how old they are. I still use the originals (Forest Green, Midnight Blue, and Scarlet urethane) as much as the newer stuff (which is still 15+ years old). The Forest, Scarlet, Aqua Marine and many others are a mushroom core with cover only over the core, no fillers. None have cracked except.......my Sage (not the Sage Tour). Guess what the Sage is? One of the few Quantums that has a wrap around the mushroom core to achieve a lower RG. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not.
3835
-
More porosity in shells mean they should actually crack less since they are less dense and therefore more "flexible." As technology advances, you will see more performance and most likely more issues. Increased performance doesn't always mean increased durability, sometimes there's a tradeoff. And he didn't say they were having curing issues, he said they weren't allowing the cores and balls the time they need to properly cure. That's an issue with process, not material.
In my opinion, from what I know of manufacturing, anything made has a natural curing time...so if the time needed is shortened, that doesn't or wouldn't eliminate that necessity...so if the core is still 'changing' or curing and the cover is poured over a changing, 'live' object, something generally gives....thus any crack becomes a gap...the core is pushing the shell away or expands
I do not believe it has anything to do with the shell thickness or porosity of the covers...
Just Rico...Yesterday a customer came in with two old balls from the 90's..
A Piranha and a Beast...Neither one was cracked...And the shells on those balls were
much thicker...In that era most shells were 1 1/2" thick...Which became the reason
Thumb slugs became popular...
Today's shells are about 3/8" thick at best...and are more porous...
I don't ever recall having cracking issues with the balls from that era...
So IMO...I think it is possible that the thinner and more porous shells on today's balls
may indeed be a reason for all the cracking issues...
I find it rather ODD that all of a sudden...All the manufacturers are having curing issues...
Shells are about 20% as thick compared to balls of that era...That means boo koo
savings on material...
just my opinion...
I also have an opinion about Obama...oops...lol
Curing issues...all of a sudden all manufacturers are having the same problem...Really now...
"more flexible"...really now...
Well if so....they why are there so many cracking issues...On Today's balls with the
thinner MORE FLEXIBLE covers...
IMO...balls made with thinner covers save the manufacturers MONEY...And the money
they save may OFFSET any cracking issues...
3/8" compared to 1 1/2"...That's a huge difference in raw material...
That's MY OPINION..
-
Ten years ago it was about $3 a ball savings.
The cheapest way to make balls is core/cover, as you save a lot of labor, but as I stated early it limits rg's and duff's.
-
[/quote]Just Rico...Yesterday a customer came in with two old balls from the 90's..
A Piranha and a Beast...Neither one was cracked...And the shells on those balls were
much thicker...In that era most shells were 1 1/2" thick...Which became the reason
Thumb slugs became popular...
Today's shells are about 3/8" thick at best...and are more porous...
I don't ever recall having cracking issues with the balls from that era...
So IMO...I think it is possible that the thinner and more porous shells on today's balls
may indeed be a reason for all the cracking issues...
I find it rather ODD that all of a sudden...All the manufacturers are having curing issues...
Shells are about 20% as thick compared to balls of that era...That means boo koo
savings on material...
just my opinion...
I also have an opinion about Obama...oops...lol
[/quote]
Good post JLS!! This would be my reasoning as well. And I'm not buying the analogy of porous, translating to more flexible either! Porous means more permeable.....as in things, water , oil, air, etc. flowing through them.
In this case it's cracks that are flowing through. The new formulas make chemicals with loosely attached bonds that can more easily be broken. Hence cracks!
On the other hand, it is that same conglomeration of loosely nit chemicals which give these new covers their ability to grip the lanes through oil. So....it's a trade-off.
-
Just Rico...Yesterday a customer came in with two old balls from the 90's..
A Piranha and a Beast...Neither one was cracked...And the shells on those balls were
much thicker...In that era most shells were 1 1/2" thick...Which became the reason
Thumb slugs became popular...
Today's shells are about 3/8" thick at best...and are more porous...
I don't ever recall having cracking issues with the balls from that era...
So IMO...I think it is possible that the thinner and more porous shells on today's balls
may indeed be a reason for all the cracking issues...
I find it rather ODD that all of a sudden...All the manufacturers are having curing issues...
Shells are about 20% as thick compared to balls of that era...That means boo koo
savings on material...
just my opinion...
I also have an opinion about Obama...oops...lol
Good post JLS!! This would be my reasoning as well. And I'm not buying the analogy of porous, translating to more flexible either! Porous means more permeable.....as in things, water , oil, air, etc. flowing through them.
In this case it's cracks that are flowing through. The new formulas make chemicals with loosely attached bonds that can more easily be broken. Hence cracks!
On the other hand, it is that same conglomeration of loosely nit chemicals which give these new covers their ability to grip the lanes through oil. So....it's a trade-off.
Exactly, just like there are no 80,000 mile performance tires for cars. Have to give up longevity to get the best performance.
But the ball companies still should own up to the facts instead of trying to tell us how it's "our fault" when a ball cracks.
-
I work in concrete research for our state's DOT, and we work a lot with intentionally adding air to the concrete to increase the porosity so it's more flexible and prevents the contaminants that are going to get into it anyway from damaging it too much. If something is more dense, once contaminants get into it, they can force apart the object because it IS more dense, and therefore less flexible. By adding air, you increase the flexibility and the bubbles or air pockets serve as reservoirs for contaminants so they don't force their way into the denser parts and cause cracking.
No, bowling balls aren't concrete, but the principle remains the same. Concrete also has several different materials in it with several different expansion and contraction rates. I just talked to one of my engineers, and two of the biggest things that cause cracking are improper curing and expansion and contraction . . She said that even if the bowling ball was all one solid material, they would STILL crack if they were exposed to enough temperature changes.
More porosity in shells mean they should actually crack less since they are less dense and therefore more "flexible." As technology advances, you will see more performance and most likely more issues. Increased performance doesn't always mean increased durability, sometimes there's a tradeoff. And he didn't say they were having curing issues, he said they weren't allowing the cores and balls the time they need to properly cure. That's an issue with process, not material.
In my opinion, from what I know of manufacturing, anything made has a natural curing time...so if the time needed is shortened, that doesn't or wouldn't eliminate that necessity...so if the core is still 'changing' or curing and the cover is poured over a changing, 'live' object, something generally gives....thus any crack becomes a gap...the core is pushing the shell away or expands
I do not believe it has anything to do with the shell thickness or porosity of the covers...
Just Rico...Yesterday a customer came in with two old balls from the 90's..
A Piranha and a Beast...Neither one was cracked...And the shells on those balls were
much thicker...In that era most shells were 1 1/2" thick...Which became the reason
Thumb slugs became popular...
Today's shells are about 3/8" thick at best...and are more porous...
I don't ever recall having cracking issues with the balls from that era...
So IMO...I think it is possible that the thinner and more porous shells on today's balls
may indeed be a reason for all the cracking issues...
I find it rather ODD that all of a sudden...All the manufacturers are having curing issues...
Shells are about 20% as thick compared to balls of that era...That means boo koo
savings on material...
just my opinion...
I also have an opinion about Obama...oops...lol
Curing issues...all of a sudden all manufacturers are having the same problem...Really now...
"more flexible"...really now...
Well if so....they why are there so many cracking issues...On Today's balls with the
thinner MORE FLEXIBLE covers...
IMO...balls made with thinner covers save the manufacturers MONEY...And the money
they save may OFFSET any cracking issues...
3/8" compared to 1 1/2"...That's a huge difference in raw material...
That's MY OPINION..
-
Gizmo...well I don't know about the roads in your state...But here in Illinois...The
roads FALL APART about every 3 - 5 years...
Maybe they are adding to much air... ;D
All I can say is...That 20 years ago we didn't seem to have a cracking issue...
Now I do agree that rapid temperature change could lead to shells cracking...
-
I personally think the filler is responsible for a lot of cracks as well. I've seen numerous balls that had a air pockets or some kind of voids in the filler. I've seen it on a few that I've drilled for myself and all 3 have ended up cracking. These voids are pretty common from a certain factory that i see a lot of cracking issues coming from their stuff.....
-
The roads fall apart because they're using cheap rock. Roads built using granite or quartzite last a while. The chemicals and salt they use in the winter to deice doesn't help much either.
20 years ago balls didn't hook either. You could scratch a VHS tape all you wanted too and would still have a picture, but if you scratch your dvd it skips . . sometimes performance and durability don't go hand in hand.
Gizmo...well I don't know about the roads in your state...But here in Illinois...The
roads FALL APART about every 3 - 5 years...
Maybe they are adding to much air... ;D
All I can say is...That 20 years ago we didn't seem to have a cracking issue...
Now I do agree that rapid temperature change could lead to shells cracking...
-
You Topekans must not be too familiar with frost heave and the resulting pot holes. Ain't no rock going to stop that.
-
You Topekans must not be too familiar with frost heave and the resulting pot holes. Ain't no rock going to stop that.
LoL!! You got that sh** right... Especially here in Chicagoland after -30 degree day or 2. LoL!!
-
Actually we are. We get below 0 in the winter and above 100 in the summer, biggest temperature swing in the country. 90% of the Kansas rock quarry's business is our DOT for building roads, but the problem is that Kansas limestone sucks for concrete. It's porous, so when water seeps inside the rock and freezes, it blows all the rock up. All our roads are built on fly ash treated subgrade underneath cement treated base underneath the concrete, so there's no heaving. All our testing with harder rock proves it to be significantly better and longer lasting. No, it won't completely stop it or prevent it, but it slows it down quite a bit.
You Topekans must not be too familiar with frost heave and the resulting pot holes. Ain't no rock going to stop that.
-
Who here has had Hyroads crack? Those shells are SUPER thick.
I did this past spring. . .but the ring finger had been plugged almost two years ago.
The crack developed all the way around the ball thru the pin.
Think I have a picture somewhere, I'll try to find it.
-
Well that's kind of the point to everybody saying that shell thickness has something to do with it.
Who here has had Hyroads crack? Those shells are SUPER thick.
I did this past spring. . .but the ring finger had been plugged almost two years ago.
The crack developed all the way around the ball thru the pin.
Think I have a picture somewhere, I'll try to find it.
-
Well that's kind of the point to everybody saying that shell thickness has something to do with it.
Who here has had Hyroads crack? Those shells are SUPER thick.
I did this past spring. . .but the ring finger had been plugged almost two years ago.
The crack developed all the way around the ball thru the pin.
Think I have a picture somewhere, I'll try to find it.
No one ever said thicker shelled balls never cracked...As Pike would say...Reading is a skill...But some of us WONDER...why there is so much cracking on today's balls...you know, the ones with the thinner shells...
Oh wait...I forgot...All the ball companies got a case of STUPID...And all at the same
time...forgot how to cure a ball..
Yep....that must be the reason...
-
JLS if you apparently have all the answers, as usual, why do you continue the discussion only to imply your superior intellect?
You have your opinion and fell it rights...let it go at that
-
Do the thinner covers (to make room for bigger cores) affect the rate that the balls cure?
On edit - must have missed this earlier. You said that the core might still be curing and that would affect the ball during the remainder of the manufacturing process. I thought the cores were made from a much denser material that wouldn't be trying to make the micro pores that make the covers do what they do. I never would have thought to place blame on the core.
-
I, like most on here, am not an expert on this subject. I think JustRico made very valid points about the curing process and the core. I will say after bowling for 41 years, going through many different eras of bowling balls and using finger inserts in almost every ball since their inception, super glue is not the reason for cracking. Cracking around fingers is usually related to using too much force when removing inserts if you use a screwdriver or like object to loosen them. I have used super glue to repair small chipped areas on balls and have never had a problem. If the reaction of the glue on the ball caused cracking, i sure would have seen something after all the balls I've repaired. I think the curing process and the bowlers lack of care when taking of a ball, is why they crack. Not super glue!!!
-
Just picked up my son's old 900 Global Break Point to test a new home made ball De-oiler. It's cracked complete around the ball. This thing has been sitting in a box for a couple years. Just sitting. The crack is new since I just moved it around a couple days ago. Crack starts at the index finger and goes around the long way to the thumb hole.
-
At least you can still test the de-oiler.
-
Does it really matter why bowling balls crack?
We've been in the "resin era" for over 20 years now, and for all those years, I've heard the same old complaints, and the same old GUESSWORK answers about cracked bowling balls.
The fact is, resin balls have ALWAYS tended to crack at a much higher rate than any other type ball.
Do the cores swell and crack the cover? Do the covers shrink around the core? Do the covers react with the chemical composition of super glue? Is it due to the different expansion/contraction ratio between the core and cover? Is this a factor more important with wide, sudden temperature variance? Are the covers actually more susceptible to cracking because of their inherent chemical composition?
IT REALLY DOESNT MATTER. The majority of bowlers spoke with their dollars long ago, and they voted in the reactive resin era by a WIDE margin. BOWLERS told manufacturers they WANTED and ACCEPTED bowling balls that could possibly crack, as long as it meant they could use them as a mechanical replacement for physical ability.
Stop harping and carping about cracking bowling balls. The hue and cry for advanced performance was long and loud, and bowlers have nobody to blame for this situation other than themselves. Cracking bowling balls is just a side effect of sacrificing durability for performance, something the manufacturers were long ago told was OK by people willing to spend more and more money, on more and more balls than ever before, all while watching the life of the product getting shorter and shorter.
-
No they didn't explicitly say it, but if they said the thinner shells were a cause of it, that would mean they thought thicker shells either didn't crack or that it reduced the probability. Logic is also a skill, and that was an extremely simple connection there. If thinner shells = more cracking, logic dictates that thicker shells = less cracking.
Well that's kind of the point to everybody saying that shell thickness has something to do with it.
Who here has had Hyroads crack? Those shells are SUPER thick.
I did this past spring. . .but the ring finger had been plugged almost two years ago.
The crack developed all the way around the ball thru the pin.
Think I have a picture somewhere, I'll try to find it.
No one ever said thicker shelled balls never cracked...As Pike would say...Reading is a skill...But some of us WONDER...why there is so much cracking on today's balls...you know, the ones with the thinner shells...
Oh wait...I forgot...All the ball companies got a case of STUPID...And all at the same
time...forgot how to cure a ball..
Yep....that must be the reason...
-
Does it really matter why bowling balls crack?
Not really, but most of us are curious anyway. Still, years ago the cracks were smaller and slower developing. You had a chance to fix them if you caught it in time. Now you have a ball that's treated with kid's gloves and you can wake up to a 3 month old ball cracked the entire way around the ball. True, we're always trying to get every ounce of performance out of a ball, but again years ago we dealt with "dead" balls that might or might not be brought back to life (resurfacing, de-oiling, ...) but now the ball is 100% completely unusable. If there's something I can do to avoid it, I want to know. If the manufacturers are to blame and it's something they can avoid, maybe we can hold them accountable.
-
I think it matters a lot.
I'd love to know why a ball that's just been sitting just up and cracks all the way around.
If it's due to how it's being stored, don't you think everyone here and most bowlers would want to know? With the cost of equipment, if I'm causing the cracks, please tell me and I'll do what's necessary to not have it happen. My son was kinda sad to see it had cracked. Picked it up and said "I still could have thrown this."
That's this point I believe. They're bowling balls. We expect to be able to let them sit and them to be there should we want to go back to them.
-
Hey Rico...Gizm
JLS if you apparently have all the answers, as usual, why do you continue the discussion only to imply your superior intellect?
You have your opinion and fell it rights...let it go at that
HEY RICO, GIZMO CONTINUES to post his views...HOW COME YOU DON'T GET ON HIM...OH YA HE AGREES WITH YOU...
This isn't rocket science...I seriously doubt that companies like Storm and Ebonite don't know how to properly CURE A bowling ball...
But according to you...MR I KNOW EVERYTHING...they don't...
Sorry Charlie...But when it comes to knowing about curing balls...I BELIEVE THAT STORM AND EBONITE KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING...
now
are we clear
In the 70's, 80's 90's we never had major issues with balls cracking...THICKER SHELLS...
But in the last 10-20 years...Cracking has become an issue...And that goes right
along with THINNER SHELLS that are more porous...
So Rico...that's my opinion....you can have yours...and so can Gizmo...
BUT DON'T TELL ME TO NOT POST MY VIEWS...NO ONE DIED AND MADE RICO THE BOSS OF BR.COM
still clear
oh and BTW...there were several people who also believed that thinner shells may be the cause...and one also posted he didn't buy in to the FLEXIBLE story...
again
still clear...
-
How are you not running the industry that amazes me...ARE WE CLEAR NOW? I happened to work for a little company for a few years and I think, barely in your eyes, that I understand how bowling balls are manufactured and a little thing known as the curing process...with today's 'we need it now' mentality, bowling balls are being pumped out quicker and quicker due to the narrow available window and what was once a week sitting on a shelf cores primarily they are going straight from mold to be poured and shipped out...thus a SHORTER CURING TIME
NOW ARE WE CLEAR MR. ITS ONLY THE SHELL BEING THINNER THAT IS CAUSINF IT?
-
Do the thinner covers (to make room for bigger cores) affect the rate that the balls cure?
On edit - must have missed this earlier. You said that the core might still be curing and that would affect the ball during the remainder of the manufacturing process. I thought the cores were made from a much denser material that wouldn't be trying to make the micro pores that make the covers do what they do. I never would have thought to place blame on the core.
How DARE you suggest that ;D :D....Mr Rico said it's a CURING PROBLEM...Now Sir...who are you to point out FACTS...To Mr.RICO...He says it's a curing problem... :D
And Gizmo pointed out "flexible" concrete... ???
So that's it sir....that's the problem...CAUSE THEY SAID SO... ???
Now Rico and Gizmo...I have an example for you...
Take a piece of wood that it 4" THICK and DENSE...And compare it to a piece of
wood that is 1" and porous...
IMO...The 1" piece of wood would crack by hand easier...Than the more THICKER DENSE piece of wood... ;D :D ;)
IMO...these guys sound like our leader...who thinks the Dems DID WELL in the mid term elections... ??? :(
They only see things one way...And if you dare to post your opinion...They blast you...
Well blast away Rico...You really think some of us CARE... ???
we're still clear...right...
HEY STORM, HEY EBONITE...Learn how to CURE your cores...
If you need help...Dial 1-800 JUSTRICO...EXT..GIZMO... ;D
-
Rico...If I remember...You were in sales for Brunswick..Before they fled the country
to make balls cheaper...
And they got lower wage earners to make their balls...YET THEY DID NOT
PASS THE SAVINGS ON TO THEIR CUSTOMERS...
Their prices on balls are in the same range as Storm and Ebonite models that
are proudly made here in the USA...
Now a few people on here posted their views...Some don't buy into YOUR
views...
So I don't understand why you think you are always right...And then tell
others to move along if we have a different opinion...
I don't believe you worked in the factory making balls...I believe you were in sales...BEFORE they got rid of you...
again...
are we clear
-
Juggarnut...Triple AAA+++
" IT REALLY DOESNT MATTER. The majority of bowlers spoke with their dollars long ago, and they voted in the reactive resin era by a WIDE margin. BOWLERS told manufacturers they WANTED and ACCEPTED bowling balls that could possibly crack, as long as it meant they could use them as a mechanical replacement for physical ability."
Now I agree with this 100%
In the last 10-20 years...Today's bowlers want HOOK...And more porous shells
has giving them what they want...
I had a teammate that took the SAME BALL to the ABC's 10 years in a row...
THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN TODAY.... Seldom do I see anyone bringing the same
ball to the USBC's more than ONCE...
Balls are like Cell Phones...As soon as I-Phone 4 comes out...you get rid of 3...
And now that I-Phone 6 is out...You get rid of 5...etc etc...
We are a disposable society...
Today's high end bowler's want performance over durability...It if don't hook... they don't want it...
Every new HP ball that comes out seems to have a more aggressive cover stock..
Columbia's new Melt Down...The most aggressive cover stock to date....Their ads
say...
And once again...Rico old buddy...IMO...I think the thinner more porous cover stocks tend to crack more...
Again...That's my opinion...
we are still clear...right...
-
A post from Steven...
Re: Thicker vs. Thinner...
« Reply #6 on: Today at 10:59:26 AM »
Quote
Quote from: milorafferty on Today at 10:26:39 AM
Oh, I agree with you about balls. I mentioned right off that the problem was with the manufacturing process.
I also posted, because I found it curious that the only recent cracking I experienced was from the same company in balls purchased about the same time.
Is it curing or manufacturing? I lean towards manufacturing just because like everything else, companies will do everything they can to streamline and save a buck, even if they know a certain percent will crack. Profit trumps everything. Still, I can see the curing angle as well.
I don't really care as long as long as my most recently cracked ball gets replaced. ;D
Report t
-
I'm fairly certain if I understand the English language that part of manufacturing relates to the curing process...if less time is allowed in normal or necessary production/manufacturing time, then it trickles down...or issues prevail...
Also the porosity of the covers really have not changed as much as you may believe over the past few years....it's called marketing
-
I'm fairly certain if I understand the English language that part of manufacturing relates to the curing process...if less time is allowed in normal or necessary production/manufacturing time, then it trickles down...or issues prevail...
Also the porosity of the covers really have not changed as much as you may believe over the past few years....it's called marketing
Rico....I was comparing covers from the 90's...AND THEY INDEED WERE THICKER...And the reactive THICK covers from that era were the reason thumb slugs
became so popular...
Many bowlers had problems releasing their thumbs...the THICK shells were to tacky...
Just this week I had a customer bring in his old Piranha...the shell was about 1 1'4" to 1 1/2" thick...
The new ball he bought...The Hot selling Crazy Antic's, had a shell about 3/8" thin...
Now NO WHERE did I ever say that every single ball is CURED probably...
I said...IMO...I do think Storm and Ebonite KNOW HOW TO CURE BALLS...
BUT...IMO...btw,,, IMO means...IN MY OPINION...I feel that thinner more porous shells MAY BE THE REASON MORE BALLS CRACK TODAY COMPARED TO 20-25 YEARS AGO...
That's more than a few years...
Once again Rico...That is simply my opinion...
And our leader, Obama says we have a right to an opinion...
and we can keep our health provider...oops...ok bad example there... ;D :D
just so you know
-
I've never really done this here, but you're an effing dumbass jls. The flexibility of something rigid is to prevent it from cracking due to THERMAL SHOCK. Going back to the article that started this whole thread, Jeff said to keep your bowling balls in temperature controlled areas to prevent expansion and contraction. And just because something is more porous doesn't mean we're talking by a lot. We make concrete that has 6% air in it that is still 6000 psi. It is just as strong as concrete with no added air AND is more resistant to thermal shock.
And speaking of reading the English language being a skill, no one EVER said there were any curing problems. It was said they weren't letting things cure long enough, but that in and of itself is not a problem, it's a poor decision.
IMO, you're an ignorant dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about, therefore your opinion is irrelevant. My entire job revolves around thickness, strength, and porosity of rigid objects and the properties thereof. I've got a pretty good handle on the concept, and being in research, we've done a bunch of crazy stuff to push limits. The thickness and porosity of the shell has NOTHING to do with it, and theoretically it should make it withstand temperature fluctuation BETTER, which is what the article is about, and is therefore what we are or should be talking about here.
Your analogy is also way off. Temperature isn't a physical force against an object, it is a force of the object against itself. It takes a lot more force to break something flexible than it does to break something dense and rigid. Something flexible gives more than something rigid. Concrete that has no added air, which is therefore more dense, will be destroyed by temperature fluctuation much quicker than concrete that has added air content. This is BECAUSE it is a more dense object exerting force against a more dense object, or itself. If a more flexible material is expanding or contracting against itself, it can withstand the force specifically because it is more flexible. I'm not sure how this isn't making sense.
However, if using extremes and apples to oranges comparisons is what makes sense to you, it's a hell of a lot easier to snap a pencil than a rubber hose. The only way the thickness comes into it is if you're suggesting that the thin covers are being damaged into cracking by the repeated impact with the pins and hard objects in the pits. But seeing as how this thread was started by referencing an article about temperature shock, it would be illogical to assume that's what you're talking about. HOWEVER, if that IS your argument, then that would be completely logical that something thinner wouldn't be able to withstand the physical force that something thicker would be able to, that makes sense or would at least be a logical argument.
-
Furthermore, you have an opinion based on your own thoughts, we have fact based arguments. If it's an opinion about personal taste like music or food, that's one thing, but if your opinion is that 10 is a higher number than 15, that doesn't qualify as an opinion, it just means you're wrong.