Author Topic: oil soaked. switch from hammer (Read 10668 times)

TeeP Nade · « **on:** August 05, 2017, 03:08:01 PM »

Buddy of mine is a big hammer guy. He keeps telling me his equipment is dead no matter how many times we put it through the rejuvenator. he's looking at getting either a daredevil trick, sure lock, or no rules. anybody have MANY games on them how quickly does storm/roto stuff "die"...i know nothing dies like a hammer haha i tell him that all the time! and yes he cleans his equipment regularly, and rejuvenates it. hes just sick of rejuvenating hammer every month lol

Luke Rosdahl · « **Reply #16 on:** August 08, 2017, 07:47:37 AM »

Hammer is by far the worst company with oil absorption, Storm/Roto is in the middle of the pack, Motiv is the best by far. However, one huge factor I've found is use of a Shammy. Doesn't matter which company, all Shammys are the same. Use of a Shammy dramatically reduces oil absorption because it gets it all off the ball unlike conventional or even microfiber towels which really just smear it around. Rejuvenators are also not nearly as effective as a Detox. We did our own internal testing, and all a Rejuvenator does is heat the ball up which heats the oil up so it will leak out. The Detox actually extracts the oil, so a Rejuvenator not reviving a Hammer ball is not surprising in the least.

CoorZero · « **Reply #17 on:** August 08, 2017, 10:47:17 AM »

Just Hammer and not the other EBI brands? Seems like all of them would share the same characteristics since they're poured in the same plant using the same materials. I'm not disagreeing with you, because that's what I've seen too, but it's kind of weird that Columbia 300, Ebonite, and Track wouldn't/don't have the same problem.

And to add I think the Brunswick family balls falls somewhere between Storm and Motiv for oil absorption. Definitely less than Storm, but more than Motiv. No idea where the 900 Global balls fall on that list.

TeeP Nade · « **Reply #18 on:** August 08, 2017, 11:09:53 AM »

Their all poured in same plant? I have no clue. Maybe it has something to do With their coverstocks? Idk maybe it's all in the head

CoorZero · « **Reply #19 on:** August 08, 2017, 11:18:38 AM »

Quote from: TeeP Nade on August 08, 2017, 11:09:53 AM

Their all poured in same plant? I have no clue. Maybe it has something to do With their coverstocks? Idk maybe it's all in the head

Yup. Columbia 300, Ebonite, Hammer, and Track balls are all poured in Hopkinsville, Kentucky. Storm and Roto Grip balls are poured in Brigham City (I think), Utah. Brunswick, DV8, and Radical balls are poured in Reynosa, Mexico (just south of the Texas border). 900 Global and AMF balls are poured in San Antonio, Texas. Visionary and Seismic balls are poured in St. Louis, Missouri. I think that's all of the big/more well-known brands.

Luke Rosdahl · « **Reply #20 on:** August 08, 2017, 12:58:58 PM »

Yeah it's weird. The other EBI brands are on par with Storm/Roto, kind of in the middle, Columbia maybe between Hammer and the rest of the pack. Brunswick is on the upper end close to Motiv, yes. Global seems to fall about the same place most of the brands do in the middle.

Sanded hybrids from everyone seem to be awful though. I used to Detox my stuff after a couple months of use, but since I started using a Shammy, haven't had to Detox anything since. Yeah I go through most balls quick, but there are a lot I keep and use a TON, and no reaction loss. Have to keep the dull stuff dull of course, but I've tried a Detox on one here or there and it "smokes" for about 30 seconds and quits. Nothing to take out.

Quote from: CoorZero on August 08, 2017, 10:47:17 AM

Just Hammer and not the other EBI brands? Seems like all of them would share the same characteristics since they're poured in the same plant using the same materials. I'm not disagreeing with you, because that's what I've seen too, but it's kind of weird that Columbia 300, Ebonite, and Track wouldn't/don't have the same problem.

And to add I think the Brunswick family balls falls somewhere between Storm and Motiv for oil absorption. Definitely less than Storm, but more than Motiv. No idea where the 900 Global balls fall on that list.

charlest · « **Reply #21 on:** August 08, 2017, 01:02:14 PM »

Quote from: Impending Doom on August 06, 2017, 10:50:18 PM

https://www.kbs-coatings.com/KBS-Klean.html

Charlest, tell us all about it!!

Never heard of it before.
I'd be cautious about using as with all cleaners not specific to bowling.
Simple Green's ads saw similar things ("a concentrated, water-based, biodegradable formula that is an excellent alternative to flammable solvents and hazardous chemicals ..."), yet most bowling ball cleaners are more effective than SG.

What I don't like is paying $10 for shipping an 8 oz. bottle costing $6.95.

I'd like to see the MSDS.
Addendum: I asked KBS to send the MSDS (Safety Data Sheet) sheet and they did. The active 2 ingredients are 1-5% potash lye (Potassium Hydrox1de) and 0.5 - 1.5% 2-Butoxy ethanol ("a colorless liquid with a mild odor. It is used as a solvent for resins, lacquers, varnishes and enamels an dis found in many hard surface cleaning products. It is also used as a gasoline additive.")

charlest · « **Reply #22 on:** August 08, 2017, 01:14:20 PM »

Quote from: CoorZero on August 08, 2017, 10:47:17 AM

Just Hammer and not the other EBI brands? Seems like all of them would share the same characteristics since they're poured in the same plant using the same materials. I'm not disagreeing with you, because that's what I've seen too, but it's kind of weird that Columbia 300, Ebonite, and Track wouldn't/don't have the same problem.

And to add I think the Brunswick family balls falls somewhere between Storm and Motiv for oil absorption. Definitely less than Storm, but more than Motiv. No idea where the 900 Global balls fall on that list.

I suspect that the different EBI branches use different formulations from potentially different suppliers. I know at one point RG used a different resin supplier than Storm did (RG did not indicate who they were, back then. I know DV8 and Radical use different chemical additives to the same base resins from (so far that I've heard) a single resin supplier, (Bayer)

So while it's possible that many brands can be poured/manufactured in the same plant, their resins can be significantly different. Are they different enough to have different rates of oil absorption and potential rejuvenation (whether by one means or another), sure, it is possible.

Impending Doom · « **Reply #23 on:** August 08, 2017, 01:15:41 PM »

As far as 900 Global covers...

Before the Storm merger, covers were great. A little oil absorption, but not a lot. Then came the psuedo Storm covers and man, something changed.

itsallaboutme · « **Reply #24 on:** August 08, 2017, 01:39:27 PM »

I guess the marketing works if you think companies that use the same executives, salesmen, marketing people, administrative assistants, designers, chemists and factory workers for all their brands actually use different suppliers and formulations for their covers.

avabob · « **Reply #25 on:** August 08, 2017, 02:19:36 PM »

I think manufacturers use different amounts and types of resin additives within their own lines. Maybe one supplier, but slightly different additives. Remember, Steve Cooper discovered the first resin additive for the Excalibur more or less by accident. There is still more trial and error than people think, even with the technical advancements the research departments have made over the years.

Having said that, Ibam pretty sure they are all guilty of making the most minute changes in formula, along with a color change and calling it a new shell formulation. Brunswick has been one of the most guilty but they all do it.

avabob · « **Reply #26 on:** August 08, 2017, 02:27:10 PM »

Biggest change I have seen over the years is in pearl covers. Starting with the Green Bolt, and up through the X Factor storm pearl use to really die on me. In recent years I see it much more in solids.

Luke Rosdahl · « **Reply #27 on:** August 08, 2017, 02:39:45 PM »

I think I'd have to agree with that. I used to be a big solid cover guy, now it's shifting towards pearls because for some reason I'm getting a lot more consistency and usability out of them, plus solids have gotten REALLY maintenance heavy now. Usability may be the big thing though, pearls are aggressive enough now to play while solids more often than not are too much at box without super heavy volumes.

Quote from: avabob on August 08, 2017, 02:27:10 PM

Biggest change I have seen over the years is in pearl covers. Starting with the Green Bolt, and up through the X Factor storm pearl use to really die on me. In recent years I see it much more in solids.

charlest · « **Reply #28 on:** August 08, 2017, 04:20:40 PM »

Quote from: itsallaboutme on August 08, 2017, 01:39:27 PM

I guess the marketing works if you think companies that use the same executives, salesmen, marketing people, administrative assistants, designers, chemists and factory workers for all their brands actually use different suppliers and formulations for their covers.

Unless you think RG was lying when they publicly stated they were using a different resin supplier than Storm ....
(Most of the RG oilers still die a miserable death; that I cannot deny.)

While I'd agree that many advertising claims fall into the category of propaganda, to say that every one does implies you believe everyone of us might as well lie down in the ground and pull in the earth after us. And I thought I was pessimistic ...

leftybowler70 · « **Reply #29 on:** August 08, 2017, 04:23:27 PM »

Absolutely without question like ^^

itsallaboutme · « **Reply #30 on:** August 08, 2017, 04:55:34 PM »

Believe whatever make you feel good.

Author Topic: oil soaked. switch from hammer (Read 10668 times)

TeeP Nade

oil soaked. switch from hammer

Luke Rosdahl

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

CoorZero

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

TeeP Nade

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

CoorZero

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

Luke Rosdahl

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

charlest

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

charlest

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

Impending Doom

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

itsallaboutme

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

avabob

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

avabob

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

Luke Rosdahl

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

charlest

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

leftybowler70

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer

itsallaboutme

Re: oil soaked. switch from hammer