win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity  (Read 5733 times)

Monster Stitch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1490
Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« on: May 12, 2014, 04:08:26 PM »
Hey guys. What differences do you see with both of these balls? I know the specs might be different because of the low rg on the shock and high rg on the zero but i know the covers are different strength wise. What is your take?

 

Gizmo823

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2167
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2014, 07:46:46 AM »
This is an interesting comparison, because when both balls came out, I felt they rolled extremely similar, and the more I see of them, the more strongly I feel about that.  Yes the numbers are different, but I really feel like the Shock is a much cheaper version of the Zero. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsPdSMGdc8s  Zero

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggavFYOF4-o  Shock

I realize there are two different people throwing them, but I really can't see much of a difference.  Even on heavier oil at Nationals I didn't see much of a difference.  The Shock if anything is a little longer and cleaner on the back. 
What would you be if you were attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis?

scotts33

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8452
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2014, 08:28:42 AM »
Everything looks the same on a house pattern.  Videos really don't mean much and those that rely on them are missing the boat IMO.

I have a hard time believing these 2 balls are even close.

I'd look at BTM and BJI reviews if they have them.
Scott

Gizmo823

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2167
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2014, 11:37:50 AM »
Videos on a house shot don't show much more than shape, but shape is the new hook.  Completely understandable, but I've seen a LOT of these balls on several different conditions, volumes, lane surfaces and oil types and they're extremely similar across the board.  Weaker cover stronger core for the Shock, stronger cover weaker core for the Zero.  However, the Shock is marketed much weaker than it actually is.  Easily the best ball at that price point on the market, "zero" contest. 

Everything looks the same on a house pattern.  Videos really don't mean much and those that rely on them are missing the boat IMO.

I have a hard time believing these 2 balls are even close.

I'd look at BTM and BJI reviews if they have them.
What would you be if you were attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis?

tkkshop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1173
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2014, 12:01:56 PM »
For a few bucks less, the Wipe Out is direct competition. The Zero will keep a similar roll on heavier volumes where the shock will want to skate. If you bowl oj nothing more than medium, they will be comparable. But that is where I raise you, the Wipe Out.

Gizmo823

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2167
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2014, 12:24:29 PM »
Eh, I saw the Shock and Zero on both patterns in Reno, and while both balls read the lanes extremely well, they both read them pretty similarly.  Again, Shock was a little later and cleaner, Zero had a bit smoother read, but too similar to split hairs on. 

For a few bucks less, the Wipe Out is direct competition. The Zero will keep a similar roll on heavier volumes where the shock will want to skate. If you bowl oj nothing more than medium, they will be comparable. But that is where I raise you, the Wipe Out.
What would you be if you were attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis?

tkkshop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1173
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2014, 01:43:23 PM »
Eh, I saw the Shock and Zero on both patterns in Reno, and while both balls read the lanes extremely well, they both read them pretty similarly.  Again, Shock was a little later and cleaner, Zero had a bit smoother read, but too similar to split hairs on. 

For a few bucks less, the Wipe Out is direct competition. The Zero will keep a similar roll on heavier volumes where the shock will want to skate. If you bowl oj nothing more than medium, they will be comparable. But that is where I raise you, the Wipe Out.
Same bowler with the same layout? Not trying to split hairs myself, but these things matter. My Zero is too strong on this years Nats team pattern, through testing only. Im looking at more of a Wipe Out as the strongest piece I can pitch. Meanwhile, others can stand to throw more ball than the Zero. Its all dependent upon how a person bowls and how they lay these two out. You even said your Revolt was not enough meanwhile Zero's are working. So I would compare the Zero to the Revolt and Wipe Out to the Shock.

Gizmo823

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2167
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2014, 03:10:44 PM »
Yes I realize that.  Been doing this a long time, I'm a ball motion and laneplay expert.  Bowler style, layout, surface, lane surface, oil type/viscosity, lane machine, humidity, even which end of the house all factor in and all matter.  But sometimes people try to overcomplicate things too much, and by and large, the Zero and Shock are very similar in reaction.  I'd like to do a comparison video but I don't know anyone who owns both balls. 

My Revolt wasn't enough on the fresh, but it wasn't at box surface either.  In years past I've been ok with a polished Taboo, Sigma Tour, etc., this year the volume played much heavier than I expected.  The shot walked into my reaction about middle of the second game on both sets, but at box surface it would have been perfect.  Zero and Revolt have two completely different shapes.  The Wipe Out also acts nothing like the Shock.  Shock is a stronger ball overall, with a cleaner and more defined move on the back.  Wipe Out is much smoother with a much slower backend transition.  The Revolt ball motion is much closer to the IQ Tour Solid, even though again the numbers don't quite match up (differential specifically). 

If I were you, I'd take a couple Tour Fusions, one at box, and one at like 2k or 3k.  Tour Fusion and Venom Shock were the best two reactions I saw when I was out there.  The LT 48 at 3k worked very well once the patterns started to break down too. 

Eh, I saw the Shock and Zero on both patterns in Reno, and while both balls read the lanes extremely well, they both read them pretty similarly.  Again, Shock was a little later and cleaner, Zero had a bit smoother read, but too similar to split hairs on. 

For a few bucks less, the Wipe Out is direct competition. The Zero will keep a similar roll on heavier volumes where the shock will want to skate. If you bowl oj nothing more than medium, they will be comparable. But that is where I raise you, the Wipe Out.
Same bowler with the same layout? Not trying to split hairs myself, but these things matter. My Zero is too strong on this years Nats team pattern, through testing only. Im looking at more of a Wipe Out as the strongest piece I can pitch. Meanwhile, others can stand to throw more ball than the Zero. Its all dependent upon how a person bowls and how they lay these two out. You even said your Revolt was not enough meanwhile Zero's are working. So I would compare the Zero to the Revolt and Wipe Out to the Shock.
What would you be if you were attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis?

CPA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2014, 11:25:36 AM »
My Revolt did not work in Reno.  It was at box plus some lane shine.  If the cover was taken down to 2000 in may have worked. 

Gizmo823

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2167
Re: Venom Shock VS Zero Gravity
« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2014, 11:47:21 AM »
Exactly what I thought . . just not quite enough on the fresh to make the turn, didn't rev or start moving soon enough. 

My Revolt did not work in Reno.  It was at box plus some lane shine.  If the cover was taken down to 2000 in may have worked.
What would you be if you were attached to another object by an inclined plane, wrapped helically around an axis?