Author Topic: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Read 8124 times)

raiderh20boy · « **on:** July 18, 2011, 09:06:36 AM »

I just started to have some fun with our new Ball Surface Scanner. So far we have got some very interesting results on some NIBS!! As an example, on a ball listed as 2000 Abralon our scanner shows an average surface of 1746 with a deviation of 638! We have found some NIB up to 800 grit more than listed, and one polished ball that is listed as 500 grit/rough buff/high gloss has a surface avg of OVER 5000!!

Use "IT" and BOWL UP A STORM!!

DukeHarding · « **Reply #1 on:** July 18, 2011, 05:10:18 PM »

Very interesting...but it doesn't really surprise me.

Duke Harding

qstick777 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 18, 2011, 06:41:46 PM »

Doesn't surprise me either. As far as the Rough Buff, Mo says it is greater than 4000 grit, and probably closer to 6000, so the 5000+ reading sounds about right.

http://forum.bowlingchat.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2806

dwandel · « **Reply #3 on:** July 18, 2011, 07:09:40 PM »

my pro shop also picked up the scanner at Bowl Expo is finding similiar results.many NIB's do not have the surface the manufacture's advertise.Some lower,some higher.Guess the only safe thing to do is resurface the ball before ever using it so you know what surface is really on the ball

DON DRAPER · « **Reply #4 on:** July 18, 2011, 07:13:28 PM »

If I owned a pro shop I would consider a Haus-type ball resurfacing machine and a Revivor to be MUCH more important than this piece of equipment.

ccrider · « **Reply #5 on:** July 18, 2011, 07:18:19 PM »

Please stop hating. Great info, for those of us who do not have a pro shop and do not want to drop several thousand for this machine.

LBHS1979 wrote on 7/18/2011 7:13 PM:If I owned a pro shop I would consider a Haus-type ball resurfacing machine and a Revivor to be MUCH more important than this piece of equipment.

Those that can do. Those that can't complain. Pimpin ain't easy, but it's mandatory.

Most things we like, we don't need. Most things we need, we don't like. Don't confuse your likes with your needs.

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 18, 2011, 07:53:10 PM »

I agree....When manfacturers use one set of pads to finish 30-40 balls as some are reported to do, there is no way the grit can be even close between the first ball and last ball done on those pads.

DukeHarding wrote on 7/18/2011 5:10 PM:Very interesting...but it doesn't really surprise me.

Duke Harding

**********************************************************************

"Whenever I feel the urge to exercise I lie down until the feeling passes away."

Brick

dougb · « **Reply #7 on:** July 18, 2011, 08:06:15 PM »

+1 on the resurfacing

dwandel wrote on 7/18/2011 7:09 PM:my pro shop also picked up the scanner at Bowl Expo is finding similiar results.many NIB's do not have the surface the manufacture's advertise.Some lower,some higher.Guess the only safe thing to do is resurface the ball before ever using it so you know what surface is really on the ball

dizzyfugu · « **Reply #8 on:** July 19, 2011, 12:46:01 AM »

No wonder to me either, just a confirmation. When I tried to replicate an OOB finish, it hardly looks the same as on the new ball. Grit scale differences could be one reason, but I think that the industrial surface finishing process just leaves a way different surface.

I just wonder what deviations can be considered "normal", and how large the variance of surface grit on a typical ball would be?

Anyway, after all it just boils down to "works" or "works not". As long as I can replicate a certain finish - even without knowing the "exact" grit - I am happy.

DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
2010/11 Benrather BC Club Champion
Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section

theop879 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 19, 2011, 01:26:09 AM »

Do ball manufacters use this tool for Quality Control?

I,ve noticed difference between Virt Grav's,

measure the surface and list it on the label, in stead of that smelly stuff

dwandel wrote on 18-7-2011 7:09 PM:
my pro shop also picked up the scanner at Bowl Expo is finding similiar results.many NIB's do not have the surface the manufacture's advertise.Some lower,some higher.Guess the only safe thing to do is resurface the ball before ever using it so you know what surface is really on the ball

DukeHarding · « **Reply #10 on:** July 19, 2011, 06:06:22 AM »

Dizzy,

Kind of makes the ball manufacturer's surface specs useless?

Say you go on a web site, and surface is listed 800/1000/2000/4000...

You buy the ball, and just love the reaction OOB....then you try to replicate the manufacturers surface....how can you do it? since you really don't know what you started with?

I guess you get a kind of general idea of the surface? and surface is considered 75% of ball reaction?

dizzyfugu wrote on 7/19/2011 0:46 AM:No wonder to me either, just a confirmation. When I tried to replicate an OOB finish, it hardly looks the same as on the new ball. Grit scale differences could be one reason, but I think that the industrial surface finishing process just leaves a way different surface.

I just wonder what deviations can be considered "normal", and how large the variance of surface grit on a typical ball would be?

Anyway, after all it just boils down to "works" or "works not". As long as I can replicate a certain finish - even without knowing the "exact" grit - I am happy.

DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
2010/11 Benrather BC Club Champion
Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section

Duke Harding

« **Reply #11 on:** July 19, 2011, 08:17:18 AM »

The manufacturer may tell you the specific steps they took, such as 500/1000/polish, but there are still way too many variables that make it impossible to recreate EXACTLY your ball's finish.

Was the abralon (sia air, sandpaper etc.) pad new? Used? Used for how many balls?

What speed was used? How much pressure applied? Water? If so, how much?

How long was spent on each step? 1 minute? 30 seconds? 2 minutes?

I say quit worrying about the exact finish. Learn to read ball reaction and make adjustments as needed to your arsenal. Even if you find your "magic" combination on a ball, can you repeat it? Even if you could, would it produce the same results now that the ball has X amount of games on it (considering wear, oil absorption, etc.)?

Surfaces are important, for sure. The fact that they can be tweaked and changed to fit a bowler's style is a very over-looked component. I just think we should eliminate the word EXACT when used in this context. It does not exist when you think of all the variables.

Lane Carter, Strike Zone Pro Shops - Salt Lake City, Utah
Brunswick Pro Shop Staff

www.brunswickbowling.com

The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.

DukeHarding · « **Reply #12 on:** July 19, 2011, 08:28:26 AM »

+100

notclay wrote on 7/19/2011 8:17 AM:
The manufacturer may tell you the specific steps they took, such as 500/1000/polish, but there are still way too many variables that make it impossible to recreate EXACTLY your ball's finish.

Was the abralon (sia air, sandpaper etc.) pad new? Used? Used for how many balls?

What speed was used? How much pressure applied? Water? If so, how much?

How long was spent on each step? 1 minute? 30 seconds? 2 minutes?

I say quit worrying about the exact finish. Learn to read ball reaction and make adjustments as needed to your arsenal. Even if you find your "magic" combination on a ball, can you repeat it? Even if you could, would it produce the same results now that the ball has X amount of games on it (considering wear, oil absorption, etc.)?

Surfaces are important, for sure. The fact that they can be tweaked and changed to fit a bowler's style is a very over-looked component. I just think we should eliminate the word EXACT when used in this context. It does not exist when you think of all the variables.

Lane Carter, Strike Zone Pro Shops - Salt Lake City, Utah
Brunswick Pro Shop Staff

www.brunswickbowling.com

The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.

Duke Harding

qstick777 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 19, 2011, 09:16:16 AM »

You can have the same problems with your pro shop. Especially when they have multiple workers.

I know I have the same issue when I use my spinner to play with the surface. I don't keep track of how many times I've used a pad/sandpaper, exact number of drops of polish, and I only use the clock in my head!

I know there are a few on here that keep detailed records on surface changes, pad usage, time, etc, but I doubt that most pro shops do.....at least I've never seen a shop that does!

notclay wrote on 7/19/2011 8:17 AM:
The manufacturer may tell you the specific steps they took, such as 500/1000/polish, but there are still way too many variables that make it impossible to recreate EXACTLY your ball's finish.

Was the abralon (sia air, sandpaper etc.) pad new? Used? Used for how many balls?

What speed was used? How much pressure applied? Water? If so, how much?

How long was spent on each step? 1 minute? 30 seconds? 2 minutes?

raiderh20boy · « **Reply #14 on:** July 19, 2011, 10:39:56 AM »

I am now printing out ball scans for all the NIBs in my shop to give to my customers! After playing with our Storm Surface Factory machine and different pads I am getting some really close finishes !!

Use "IT" and BOWL UP A STORM!!

Author Topic: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Read 8124 times)

raiderh20boy

New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DukeHarding

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

qstick777

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dwandel

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DON DRAPER

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ccrider

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Brickguy221

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dougb

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dizzyfugu

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

theop879

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DukeHarding

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DukeHarding

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

qstick777

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

raiderh20boy

Re: New Ball Surface Scanner interesting results!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!