win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Mini Review: Machine  (Read 1001 times)

C-G ProShop-Carl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5825
Mini Review: Machine
« on: March 06, 2006, 03:04:39 AM »
I drilled up the Machine and didn't have time to use it before New Castle City Tournament hit, but I threw it anyways. This mini review is based off of 6 games for singles/doubles.

Ball: Pin 4 1/2 from PAP under the ring finger, MB is located 4 1/2 from PAP

Line: I was playing on a pair that had a lefty, a guy playing deeper than I was, a guy playing a similiar line and 2 guys playing from 5 board straight to the pocket with dulled up equipment. The shot I started out playing was not there for very long. I started during practice standing 26 with my feet targeting my breakpoint at 12....I stayed there for the first game. I ended up having to move over to 18 with my feet and targeting strait up 4 board with alot of speed and killing as many revs as possible. Straighter is greater in this house.

Reaction:
When compared with the Artillery the Machine is earlier, but the backend is pretty close. The Machine read early and started making a strong move at about 40 ft. I know if I was able to get around the ball more it would have had much more backend than I was getting. Deep inside lines didn't carry good at this house, so I did what I had to do to keep it straighter. As the mids and heads start going the Machine DEFINATELY becomes very difficult to control.

Impact:
Folks....this is a Track ball, it definately hits. It does not hit quite as hard as the Artillery, but it keeps the pins lower and pushes them straight back.

Readability:
The Machine is too strong for me to read lanes with. I prefer a ball more like the Heat Blast to read a pattern. The Machine has too much backend to read a pattern.

Overall EARLY Comments:
This season at the house we bowled city at I have been in a constant struggle. I am not averaging bad, but I am not where I should be. The Machine did awesome for the first time out with it. I see it as stronger than the Xception 5.0....it reacts sooner on the lane and has a very strong move on the backend. A good ball that I believe will work for man different styles. For the conditions I see most of the time I will be using the Machine for Med/Heavy, Artillery for mediums, and Blast as my benchmark ball. VERY good equipment in the early year for Track....if this is a sign for what is to come this year, I cannot wait to see what is next!

Once I get more games on the ball I will post my final review.
--------------------
C-G Pro Shop (owner/operator)
Youngstown Ohio

Track Intl.-Amateur/Pro Shop Staff
www.trackbowling.com
www.startabowlingrevolution.com


Tag Team Member #1
Carl Hurd

Austintown Ohio (Wedgewood Lanes)

900 Global, AMF Staff Bowler

Tag Team Member #1

<b><i>TAG TEAM COACHING!!!!!!</i></b>/

 

freak761

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 565
Re: Mini Review: Machine
« Reply #1 on: March 07, 2006, 02:23:32 PM »
Everything I've read including the BJI review from Joe Cerar indicates that it is a pearl particle, Fang LS.

chitown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5876
Re: Mini Review: Machine
« Reply #2 on: March 07, 2006, 03:29:36 PM »
Yes the Fang LS is a particle pearl cover.