win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Neptune vs. Mercury  (Read 2462 times)

fins4ever88

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2199
Neptune vs. Mercury
« on: January 04, 2007, 01:10:28 PM »
I'm going to be in the market for a light oil ball in the next month or two, and I plan on going to Roto-Grip for this one. I was planning on the Mercury, but now I see the Neptune is coming out. Does anyone know which ball will be stronger?
--------------------
---Ryan
Logged

 

DerHornen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2007, 11:59:03 PM »
http://www.ballreviews.com/Forum/Replies.asp?TopicID=148182&ForumID=77&CategoryID=2

See this post, especially the reply by Roger Noordhoek (3rd reply). They used the same core, but flipped it over. This gives the Neptune a lower differential, and therefore less flare.  I would say the Neptune would be a little bit weaker because of a smoother backend.

Did I miss anything Roger?
--------------------
Quote of the Year:  LaDainian Tomlinson
"Football players want to be basketball players, and baseball players want to play golf. And golfers want to be rock stars and rock stars want to sit in the Monday night ESPN booth and obliterate all commentary regarding the action on the field."


Edited on 1/5/2007 1:00 AM
Logged

fins4ever88

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2199
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2007, 05:08:36 PM »
Were people able to use the Mercury as a light oil ball? I currently have a Tropical Storm as my medium-light ball, and I would like to fit a ball under it because I love my T-Storm right now and don't want to mess with the cover yet.

I was thinking a weaker drill on a Mercury, but then I saw the Neptune and now I'm thinking this might be the ticket. Otherwise, I could always go to Brunswick and get a Dry/R, but I wanted to try out Roto.

Thanks for the help!
--------------------
---Ryan
Logged

LuckyLefty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17348
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2007, 05:15:31 PM »
I have a Sonic X solid...LOVE.

A sonic Boom(very good but strong).

A Super Sonic in a box...but love others I've seen.

And the Saturn is super.

They have some great lighter oil balls...that I know!

The Tropical I have seen seem to be similar to my Boom!

REgards,

Luckylefty
--------------------
Open the door...see what's possible...and just walk right on through...that's how easy success feels..
Logged
It takes Courage to have Faith, and Faith to have Courage.

James M. McCurley, New Orleans, Louisiana

Raven829

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2007, 01:47:06 AM »
I don't believe that a Mercury would fit under a Tropical Storm.  My Mercury covers quite a few boards, even on medium-ish oil.  Here is a post I made last year on another forum with a video link to me using the Mercury.  As for the Neptune...I will probably give it a try when it comes out.  I'll wait for some more feedback from other users before I make a final decision on it though.

Posted on 2-23-06:

Weight- 15# 2oz. 3.3oz top (starting)
Ending Statics- 7/8 pos. side, 0 thumb/finger
Layout- Pin above bridge, about 5.5x4 CG right an inch, no hole
Coverstock- Box Finish (1500 polished)

The lanes have Guardian...some have up to 3 coats. This was on our house shot that had a bit of open bowling before I got there. I had read some reviews that said this ball didn't hook a whole lot, and to drill it agressively. Hmm...

http://www.bowlingkingdom.com/persimages/userupload/Mercury(NEW1).MPG

As always, comments are welcome.

Don

Edit- Link won't post correctly, so you have to copy/paste it into your browser.
--------------------
"On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage.  Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me. The problem we have to address more than anything is the home run problem."
~Dusty Baker being a total fool

Edited on 1/9/2007 2:50 AM
Logged
1. Don't be a dick
2. Try not to hurt others

stone8

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2007, 11:59:04 AM »
Had a chance to demo the Saturn and Neptune this weekend.  The Neptune is definitely for drier lanes.  I would say the Neptune is a min of 5 boards weaker than the Saturn.  The Neptune WILL NOT over react.  Very clean through the heads and mids, with a mild arc to the pocket.  Needed to polish the Saturn to get it down the lane and read the pattern properly.  Looking at the Saturn to help out the lower end of my arsenal.
--------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I've been lucky long enough...now I'd like to get good.

Edited on 1/15/2007 3:24 PM
Logged

fins4ever88

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2199
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2007, 08:41:32 PM »
Great, I'm excited at the possibility of the Neptune. Saw specs on it, only 2 inches of flare potential? Sounds like it'll be controllable on lighter conditions.
--------------------
---Ryan
Logged

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Neptune vs. Mercury
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2007, 11:05:19 PM »
quote:
Were people able to use the Mercury as a light oil ball? I currently have a Tropical Storm as my medium-light ball, and I would like to fit a ball under it because I love my T-Storm right now and don't want to mess with the cover yet.

I was thinking a weaker drill on a Mercury, but then I saw the Neptune and now I'm thinking this might be the ticket. Otherwise, I could always go to Brunswick and get a Dry/R, but I wanted to try out Roto.

Thanks for the help!
--------------------
---Ryan


Unfortunately, RG does not use weak covers. My feeling is that the Mercury almost no matter the drilling, will never be weaker than a Tropical Storm.

In my opinion, I'd look to a polished Blue/Green Centaur or a pearl urethane, to fit under a Tropical.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Pages: [1]
« previous next »