Author Topic: Urethane Experiment just about over for me (Read 4093 times)

Neptune66 · « **on:** January 09, 2011, 12:51:18 PM »

Started last year when I saw a couple of fellow bowlers using the Natural on fried lanes with some great results. Bought with high hopes and had a couple of great games, but mostly mundane results. Fast forward a year and they both gave up on theirs, and I have banished mine to my not-so-favorite house with the crummy (aka non-existent) backends. Maybe it's a better ball for houses with no substantial backend?

Granted I have very low revs and decent speed, but I just cannot consistently get this ball to perform. Either comes in at too shallow of an angle or gets into a roll too early and misses left (am right-handed). Problem is that it makes one move around mid-lane and then moves again at the backend (regular house has very strong backends). It's hard enough aiming a ball according to when it will change direction once, but when it changes direction twice (no matter how slight), it's more of a challenge. and the whole point of this ball ----at least for me--- was to have something a step above plastic and not quite as strong as my weakest reactive.

Not saying it's a bad ball. Just doesn't match up at all with my game. But.... will see what it does at the other house where it might be just the ticket to smooth out some pretty spotty lane conditions. And of course...as mentioned, barely perceptible backends.

DavidKSNK · « **Reply #1 on:** January 11, 2011, 08:04:01 AM »

Actually it is a great ball when you have a lot of backend. One of the things to keep in mind with the Natural is that in spite of the fact that ball flares, it can be very speed sensitive if you don't put a lot on the ball.

Also...as far as aiming for when the ball will change direction, that's sort of what you're supposed to do. If you are getting different reactions every time you throw it, then you're not consistent in what you are doing. Resin tends to mask this...the Natural isn't a true old school ball because of the weight block...but it can do a lot more than people realize. If you can rotate around the side of the ball a lot, the ball can hook as much as entry level resin stuff. I was recently playing the 4th arrow with the Natural and I had a great reaction with it.

dizzyfugu · « **Reply #2 on:** January 11, 2011, 08:15:22 AM »

Agree - one thing you have to know or learn that a classic urethane with a hard shell behaves much different from a resin piece. The core helps getting it into a roll, but urethane is much more release error sensitive than a reactive ball. A dirty back end will also affect a urethane, because the shell is less porous and its traction mainly comes from surface prep, and the core helps a bit, too.

Urethane shines when you need a smooth response to friction, and due to its hardness it copes well with dried out heads - at least better than a reactive piece. But you have keep in mind that it has to be played differently. A Natural behaves like a very tame reactive piece - the difference is even more severe if you take a true old school piece like a Faball Hammer! This allows even less error and mistakes.

DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section

scotts33 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 11, 2011, 08:19:52 AM »

Exactly...I have been saying this til the cows come home. Urethane works great on shorter patterns with fresh crisp back ends. But, they act like bulldozers push existing head oil into the back end making the shot more iffy especially in 5 man leagues on the right side where you may see more than one user using urethane.

Bowlers that tend to use or want to use urethane are those that are rev dominant that can't get newer tech resin covers down the lane or are bowling on more desert like conditions. What is needed IMO is not urethane in these cases but a new technique and higher ball speed.

Bowlers that rely on urethane in this day in age are painting themselves in a corner....just may take. On a few shorter patterns it might make sense but overall there are better ways to go.

Scott

dizzyfugu · « **Reply #4 on:** January 11, 2011, 08:30:36 AM »

Yup - I have tried some urethane or urethane-like pieces, and can confrim the difference. Adding to the Brad Angelo statement, it is IMHO important to think rather of reaction shapes and utilities than just a bowling ball. Sometimes, a rolly piece with a smooth/weak cover is just the ticket for a certain condition and style, for another player a long and flippy reactive can be the proper solution. Balls are sport equipment, and they should perform a certain task, complementary to each other. Urethane can fulfill a special role in this overall picture, but it is important to understand and accept that it is a different technology package than a resin ball.

DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section

DavidKSNK · « **Reply #5 on:** January 11, 2011, 08:31:42 AM »

Any bowling ball that flares (which all of these new urethane balls do) will remove oil from the lane every time it is thrown down the lane.

Also Ryan Ciminelli did pretty well throwing urethane out there on tour or regionals...and I've watched him do just fine with resin at regionals too. You're not painting yourself into a corner with urethane especially the new ones..the old ones more so, the new ones not as much. They have a ton of hitting power that the older ones did not have.

scotts33 wrote on 1/11/2011 9:19 AM:Exactly...I have been saying this til the cows come home. Urethane works great on shorter patterns with fresh crisp back ends. But, they act like bulldozers push existing head oil into the back end making the shot more iffy especially in 5 man leagues on the right side where you may see more than one user using urethane.

Bowlers that tend to use or want to use urethane are those that are rev dominant that can't get newer tech resin covers down the lane or are bowling on more desert like conditions. What is needed IMO is not urethane in these cases but a new technique and higher ball speed.

Bowlers that rely on urethane in this day in age are painting themselves in a corner....just may take. On a few shorter patterns it might make sense but overall there are better ways to go.

Scott

avabob · « **Reply #6 on:** January 11, 2011, 09:42:56 AM »

It should come as no surprise that when urethane was in its boom period, lanes were oiled for 24 feet with no buffdown. Also oil volumes were much lower. Like plastic, urethane is very sensitive to carrydown. With the higher volumes of oil and much longer buffs, urethane becomes very conditions specific. I bought mine to try ondry lanes. I did find a couple of broken down house patterns were it worked pretty well, but on any flatter pattern the carrydown took it out of play after a few shots. On the brighter side, I polished mine up a bit and I like it for spares much patter than polyester. It doesn't get that skate out through the heads, but I can still through it very straight on pretty toasty conditions. I shot 40 clean at the BJ last spring using it for my spare ball.

scotts33 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 11, 2011, 09:46:53 AM »

Ryan Ciminelli is an anomoly a wrongsider first then with a high rev rate. Again what I said is for average house type bowlers not pro's. For Joe Bowler yes there are better options.

DavidKSNK wrote on 1/11/2011 9:31 AM:Any bowling ball that flares (which all of these new urethane balls do) will remove oil from the lane every time it is thrown down the lane.

Also Ryan Ciminelli did pretty well throwing urethane out there on tour or regionals...and I've watched him do just fine with resin at regionals too. You're not painting yourself into a corner with urethane especially the new ones..the old ones more so, the new ones not as much. They have a ton of hitting power that the older ones did not have.
scotts33 wrote on 1/11/2011 9:19 AM:Exactly...I have been saying this til the cows come home. Urethane works great on shorter patterns with fresh crisp back ends. But, they act like bulldozers push existing head oil into the back end making the shot more iffy especially in 5 man leagues on the right side where you may see more than one user using urethane.

Bowlers that tend to use or want to use urethane are those that are rev dominant that can't get newer tech resin covers down the lane or are bowling on more desert like conditions. What is needed IMO is not urethane in these cases but a new technique and higher ball speed.

Bowlers that rely on urethane in this day in age are painting themselves in a corner....just may take. On a few shorter patterns it might make sense but overall there are better ways to go.

Scott

Scott

Nodsleinad · « **Reply #8 on:** January 11, 2011, 10:17:11 AM »

Last night i used and Ebonite Turbo Black in a wood house with good surface and a house shot. Stayed right, 15 with feet 9 or so at arrows (very direct) and go 230-257-269. So Urethane has its days. I could of been left and circled the lane i.e. Resin but get bad carry in this house. At this house their is great carry direct and poor when to deep and resin makes one get to left with the release to target angles for optimum carry.

May try a new Urethane but it was fun tossing some old stuff..memories. Adjustments are also totally different with Urethane -vs-Resin

LTBOCSFM

avabob · « **Reply #9 on:** January 11, 2011, 10:25:55 AM »

I threw 20 in a row on a house shot using urethane in practice, but again, it is very condition specific. I also shot 257 out of the gate in a high roller qualifying, but totally lost my carry by the second frame of the second game. Even high rev players can only use it outside on most conditions I have seen. The two handers in the US vs World last Sunday were using plastic and urethane at the end of the game, but they were playing well outside 10 board on a cheetah pattern. I have had similar look with plastic, because it will hold on longer patterns with low oil volume better than urethane, but again extremely condition specific. If oil volumes were cut back to 8-10 ml instead of the 20-27 that is common today you would see more opportunity for both urethane and plastic.

six pack · « **Reply #10 on:** January 11, 2011, 10:36:18 AM »

I like urethane for spares and as a last ditch option when nothing else is working.but to be honest I'd rather play deep with resin.

The harder I try the harder they fall

charlest · « **Reply #11 on:** January 11, 2011, 11:41:57 AM »

This is all very educational. The way you folks all talk about "urethane" seems to be the way I saw the AMF Hype Urethane, but you're all talking about the Storm Natural. Originally, I had thought the Storm Natural BECAUSE of the way it was so easy to polish, that it was more more a blend of resin and urethane. Now, due to this discussion, AND the reviews of the Natural Pearl, whose stock surface is 4000 grit dull, I see the Natural is more like the AMF Urethane than anything else.

Having had and tried the AMF urethane to no avail, I tried the Brunswick Avalanche urethane, a pearl urethane polished. The AU is nothing whatever like the Natural or the Hype Urethane - no resemblance whatsoever. It is more like a polished slightly rolly resin ball. It gets easier length and actually has a defined breakpoint and hitting power without the excessive (estimated 18 mph) ball speed required by the Natural and the Hype Urethane to "hit".

The Brunswick AU, I would recommend to anyone, despite their ball speed. Mine is 13 - 14 at the pit, based on Qubica gauges. I can use it this ball as alternative to the Slingshot and the Slide and several other "dry" lanes balls.

Once you try it, you will wonder how others have written what they have in this discussion.

Neptune66,

I can readily recommend you try this, the Brunswick Avalanche Urethane. It is COMPLETELY different from the Natural. You will wonder how you can ever have said that your "urethane" experiment was over. Limiting yourself to a single ball in such an experiment was not ... well-advised.

"None are so blind as those who will not see."
BowlingChat.net

cheech · « **Reply #12 on:** January 11, 2011, 12:38:52 PM »

younger people have to realize that the definition of a urethane reaction is several feet earlier than resin. when most people move to all the weak stuff they assume the ball will still get down the lane then not move. urethane will still move just in the midlane then very little backend

i have the natural pearl and late in the block when i run out of room in, i move to the natural pearl and move back on top of all the burn with a nice smooth reaction. its a good time

sacred heart university bowling, jr.
greatest accomplishment:shooting 603 and not shooting one 200 game(130,173,300)...lol
balls for sale in my profile
everyone is born right handed, only the gifted overcome it

Neptune66 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 11, 2011, 08:52:56 PM »

I may still try another Urethane (like the Brunswick AU) some day.

And I don't have much "hand", and that's probably part of the problem. Also... not sure, but I think I said in my original post that I wasn't declaring the Natural a bad ball. Just not a good match for me.

dougb · « **Reply #14 on:** January 11, 2011, 09:14:50 PM »

I have a Natural drilled very aggressive and I can make that ball hook all the way across the lane. I sanded it down and could make it hook on oil. While it is a great control piece, it doesn't carry corners like my reactive resin balls do. But it's definitely a go-to piece when the lanes are drying out or jumpy.

My old Blue Hammer, however, outshines most of my equipment. I can also make that ball hook and the carry is phenomenal. I use it on light to medium and for spares (right and left side). My high game (252) is with the Blue Hammer.

Don't give up on urethane. There's a time and place for it.

Author Topic: Urethane Experiment just about over for me (Read 4093 times)

Neptune66

Urethane Experiment just about over for me

DavidKSNK

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

dizzyfugu

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

scotts33

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

dizzyfugu

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

DavidKSNK

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

avabob

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

scotts33

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

Nodsleinad

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

avabob

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

six pack

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

charlest

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

cheech

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

Neptune66

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me

dougb

Re: Urethane Experiment just about over for me