win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: disappointment with the IQ Tour  (Read 9796 times)

jpgtp300

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 44
disappointment with the IQ Tour
« on: December 05, 2012, 08:45:27 PM »
am I the only one not pleased with the IQ Tour? imo this ball does not carry well at all.  I tried using it at box finish and the ball picked up too early for me and forced me deeper than I wanted to be and carry suffered...so I put a little polish on the ball and it gave me more length. the extra length allowed me to play further right, however, when I tried to be clean with my release I left ringing 10s and blower 7s.  if I got on the ball a little it was 4s and 9s.  im disappointed in this $180 paperweight. 

 

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2012, 08:48:40 PM »
Check the flares, if they are too tight they'll create over/under in the pins. If they are tight, add a weight hole down the VAL to open them up. You'll be surprised at how much it'll change it for the better.
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

islenmetfan4life

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2012, 09:52:39 PM »
I had the opposite problem with my iq tour at first... I drilled it fairly weak and it just never got into a roll fast enough. It was too over/under downlane, and i tried a bunch of surface chances that didn't seem to work. I considered putting a hole in it, but after it got about 20 games on it, the backend overreaction calmed down. I finally found the right surface (2000 with very light polish) and now it's much better. still isn't as versatile or benchmark-ish as I thought it would be, but it's good enough. It was a misconception that it would work for me on most lane conditions, but it definitely needs oil.

northface28

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3333
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2012, 10:59:35 PM »
Ive learned the tighter your angles with this ball, the better. In or out, dont matter. Its NOT a good ball for guys who pitch the ball all over the place or have a lot of ”left to right” (right handed) in their game. Get a vr solid or something else that has a stronger diff.
NLMB 150 Dream Team
#NoTalking
#HellaBandz

Russell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2012, 11:38:33 PM »
Just remember....balls don't carry...matchups do.

If the ball isn't carrying, something in the equation isn't right:

Bowler + Ball (Surface+Drilling+Core+Cover) /Oil Pattern = Strike

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2012, 07:48:15 AM »
You're right about matching up but you can also enhance the ball's reaction by some alterations with surface and flare manipulation.
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2012, 07:57:27 AM »
am I the only one not pleased with the IQ Tour? imo this ball does not carry well at all.  I tried using it at box finish and the ball picked up too early for me and forced me deeper than I wanted to be and carry suffered...so I put a little polish on the ball and it gave me more length. the extra length allowed me to play further right, however, when I tried to be clean with my release I left ringing 10s and blower 7s.  if I got on the ball a little it was 4s and 9s.  im disappointed in this $180 paperweight. 

I believe you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion here.

Remember 2 things about the IT:
1. Its coverstock is pretty strong by anyone's measure.
2. The stock surface is 4000 grit, which can be fairly flexible for most people. But can be very inconsistent if you apply polish over it.

There's potentially a sensitive (not big, not small) difference in ball reaction between 4000 dull and 4000 + polish. You should try setting the surface to somewhere around 1000, 1500 or 2000 grit and then applying a light dose of polish to it. I'd suggest starting off with 1500 grit. This surface will be much less sensitive to oil conditions and wet/drys than 4000 grit + polish, which can tend to be on the too-sharp-of-a-breakpoint side without actually being skid/flip. Your blower 7s and ringing 10 pins say that.
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

tdub36tjt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1542
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2012, 08:06:50 AM »
Sounds like you may have laid it out to weak...you have to consider this isn't like most higher end balls. This core has low differential and isn't very strong. So a weak layout can take nearly all the flare out. I would recommend putting a hole down like rico suggested. Sounds like it isn't transitioning fast enough in the back.....

jpgtp300

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 44
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2012, 08:19:48 AM »
Thank all of you for the suggestions.  I went with one of my favorite layouts with the iq tour which for me is pin over bridge with a hole down.  I like to put a hole down on most pin up layouts because for me it helps smooth out the backend.  I am leaning toward what charlest recommended...it makes sense.  I will try this and let you know what happens. Thank you

storm making it rain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2012, 12:14:56 PM »
Have to agree and say it's either the drilling or surface.  I haven't seen anyone that doesn't love this ball.  I personally have 2 of them at different surfaces and they re both great.  Drilled up a IQ Pearl yesterday and can't wait to use it.

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #10 on: December 06, 2012, 12:54:24 PM »
Thank all of you for the suggestions.  I went with one of my favorite layouts with the iq tour which for me is pin over bridge with a hole down.  I like to put a hole down on most pin up layouts because for me it helps smooth out the backend.  I am leaning toward what charlest recommended...it makes sense.  I will try this and let you know what happens. Thank you

I'd also suggest that tdub36tjt does have a point about it being drilled too weak. That type of drill is better if you have an average or higher amount of RG Differential ( which results in more flare). A high and wide pin placement does reduce the flare a lot and, depending on your rev rate/ball speed ratio, yours might have been so low as to have added to the problem. With its low differential, you probably needed a smaller pin-PAP distance.

A P3 or P4 weight hole could help a lot plus a rough surface under the polish, so that it's length is more than the stock 4000 grit matte's length. You might even want to start with a 1000 grit surface under the polish, instead of a 1500 grit. Just to start the experiment, before adding a weight hole.
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

avabob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2779
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2012, 01:51:48 PM »
Not sure what conditions you are using the IQT on, but it is really a ball for more demanding conditions.  I tested one on a tough Kegel pattern, and it really gave me a better look to the hole than anything else I had coming off the end of the oil.  Also the IQT was a very good option for a lot of guys on a nasty 38 foot pattern at the Senior High Roller a couple of weeks ago. 

left-hook

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #12 on: April 07, 2013, 09:08:05 AM »
mine is pin below ring and its amazing!! i'm gonna get 2 more!!

LookingForALeftyWall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2013, 12:24:16 PM »
Like others have said, this ball tends to shine on tougher shots.  I used this ball to win a qualifier into the USBC Masters (FIGJAM) on the Masters oil pattern.  I tend not to use it on house shots unless they are higher volume shots.

avabob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2779
Re: disappointment with the IQ Tour
« Reply #14 on: April 08, 2013, 11:33:21 AM »
I have tried both the solid and the pearl.  Pearl isnt bad, but nothing special.  Solid is a great ball on tournament patterns.  I think it is actually better for straighter lower rev guys like myself.  I have seen a lot of good seniors using them at high rollers with great results.  Not so much from the younger tour guys.