We typically don’t see low oil absorption in high end balls.

SPEC is absolutely innovative. Sure, the motion isn’t anything new, but pretending that improving surface longevity isn’t innovative is just silly. There’s more to innovating than just ball motion.

As for “don’t mistake improvements in ball manufacturing as innovative”, I don’t even know what to say. Something new or different to improve a process or product is literally the definition of innovative. People seem to be confusing the word innovative with “things that are important to me”.

Sure, some “innovation” is just marketing jargon, and from a ball motion standpoint we’re pretty much maxed out. Still, there’s lots to be done to improve the quality and longevity of balls.

Quote from: michael.willis9 on May 14, 2019, 09:21:17 AM

Quote from: ignitebowling on May 13, 2019, 09:12:03 PM

Quote from: michael.willis9 on May 13, 2019, 02:18:47 PM

i highly disagree with the idea that innovation is dead in any ways shape or form.

hell even in the last not even 6 months, we've seen the crux prime and the covert tank which are bringing out something new.

we're essentially common folk, sitting here trying to discuss innovation.  there's people whose job it is to come up with new stuff... it'll happen, they're researching things we can't even picture unless you've been working in the field forever but also have a forward thinking mind

What has either ball truly shown us we haven't seen before and is changing bowling? Creative marketing now considered innovation?

maybe I'm naive but have we really seen this "low oil absorption" before?

Yes. Not all bowling balls act like a sponge.


 If a manufacturer tells you something is innovative,  but isn't doing it in every ball they make going forward…..  it probably isn't a big deal.

So TaylorMade should include Twist Face, carbon fiber and adjustable weight tech on their low end RBZ Drivers too?

No really, the new Tide IS actually new and improved...

Please, USBC has restricted what the ball companies can do to such an extent that there is little to nothing they(ball companies) can do to improve their product. It's all marketing at this point.


But you staffers go ahead and tell us different, it's okay, we know it's your job. 

Why was Quantum innovative in switching to ball filler then years later innovative by not using it? 

Goals and technology change. The goal then was to maintain the performance numbers of the core across the board in all weights. Innovative at the time. Switching to no filler has benefits of increased hitting power with the issue of needing 3 different inner cores to maintain performance numbers in 14-16. That innovation led to matching the hitting power of 2 piece balls while still using an outer core material so the same core could be used 14-16lbs with having the durability of a Quantum... DynamiCore was born. Not only does it mimic thick shell hitting power, but increases durability and reduces cracking. This is not marketing fluff, we have the data to back that up. They examined where balls were failing and the most common reason was drilling too close to a pin creating weak spots and eventual failure. DOT was born...

Between Fearless, Prowler & Notorious (Balls that feature DOT & DynamiCore), we had to warranty 10 balls to date. 10. Of the thousands and thousands of balls sold. 10.

DOT will eventually make its way onto future balls, it's not as easy as just putting a pin on the bottom instead. It's an entire redesign of the core, so only newly designed top performance cores are getting the technology to start. You'll see quite a few more going forward, starting with Bowl Expo.

Pk 18, and activator ate about the most durable covers I have seen. 

Why was Quantum innovative in switching to ball filler then years later innovative by not using it? 

Goals and technology change. The goal then was to maintain the performance numbers of the core across the board in all weights. Innovative at the time. Switching to no filler has benefits of increased hitting power with the issue of needing 3 different inner cores to maintain performance numbers in 14-16. That innovation led to matching the hitting power of 2 piece balls while still using an outer core material so the same core could be used 14-16lbs with having the durability of a Quantum... DynamiCore was born. Not only does it mimic thick shell hitting power, but increases durability and reduces cracking. This is not marketing fluff, we have the data to back that up. They examined where balls were failing and the most common reason was drilling too close to a pin creating weak spots and eventual failure. DOT was born...

Between Fearless, Prowler & Notorious (Balls that feature DOT & DynamiCore), we had to warranty 10 balls to date. 10. Of the thousands and thousands of balls sold. 10.

DOT will eventually make its way onto future balls, it's not as easy as just putting a pin on the bottom instead. It's an entire redesign of the core, so only newly designed top performance cores are getting the technology to start. You'll see quite a few more going forward, starting with Bowl Expo.

It's always about "change" or alleged changes

Brands went to filler years ago for a reason.  Now some on select products are going back to no filler because??  Sales. 

 We were sold on going away from filler was better now not having filler is better. It's the bowling industry in a nuttshell. Filler is good,  then it was bad,  then it was good for certain things…

"The people who told us about sun block were the same people who told us, when I was a kid, that eggs were good. So I ate a lot of eggs. Ten years later they said they were bad. I went, "Well, I just ate the eggs!" So I stopped eating eggs, and ten years later they said they were good again! Well, then I ate twice as many, and then they said they were bad. Well, now I'm really fucked! Then they said they're good, they're bad, they're good, the whites are good, th-the yellows - make up your mind! It's breakfast I've gotta eat!"