Recently I have been noticing newer releases with quick downlane response/ fast response at the end of the pattern/ or faster off the spot and seeing that some balls are achieving that different than other balls.  Just as an example I have lately taken notice of the Lane #1 Difference--out for a couple of years now and achieving the quick response mainly because of the very high intermediate differential---and now seeing the vids and promo's for the Radical Cash bowling ball, while although having a fairly strong asymmetrical core, seems to create the quick response to friction very much based on the aggressive reactive cover on the ball.   I am not wondering if you think one ball is better than the other but rather if you think one releases way of generating that fast response is more beneficial than another's balls way of achieving it, and what type of ball(generally speaking) would you prefer for that---core dominant or cover dominant?

My real experience with "heavy oilers" or flood balls are a visionary Midnight Scorcher which does not have a quick response and is more heavy and even in how it goes about attacking heavy and/or longer oil and a Centaur AMB Particle which although being reactive with particle, is quite early as well--and my Immortal Solid which is more core dominant than cover.  I am not saying I will be getting something else, but since I will be bowling on a 45 foot heavy oil pattern in march(greater than 28.00 volume) while also being fairly flat, I  was just wondering if something other than the stuff I typically use or more modern might give me a better look in such situations.

Any thoughts?

Brad

Wider flare responds slower to friction. Tighter flare rings respond quicker to friction.  Coverstock is also a big factor.

The more aggressive covers and cores allow the ball to slow down sooner and react at the end of the pattern. Other wise the ball skids too far and is unable to recover. 

What I was really getting at with giving two examples -- Lane #1 Difference --quicker response generated mainly through the core (.040 int diff) --and then something like the new cash --quicker response generated mainly through the cover. I am just wondering is one way of generating that faster response "better" or more advantageous than the other way of generating it?

Brad

Brad,

Not a ball driller here, but wouldn't the core be a more 'fixed' variable after drilling?  The coverstock will go through changes from lane contact/wear, oil exposure/saturation and different resurfacings.

This makes sense, but at the same time, how much of a difference in downlane reaction do you think could be accomplished by drilling alone?  I agree it can assist in getting that "quick" reaction, but coverstock will still be the biggest factor.

If I put a quick response drill on a dull even rolling ball like a Storm Rocketship, how much downlane reaction will I get?  I would assume I would get a quicker downlane reaction from an even rolling drill on a HyRoad Pearl.

If a bowler wants a ball to have a quick reaction (I am assuming this is similar to the skid/snap terminology) a combination of drill and surface is the best with an emphasis on coverstock being the most important.