Author Topic: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions (Read 1634 times)

GuyGood · « **on:** February 24, 2009, 04:28:52 AM »

Hi guys,

After being highly pleased with my Ogre Pearl I now need something stronger to complete my ball "arsenal". At the moment it is only the Ogre Pearl(, a pretty dead Storm Shift which I use for light/dry conditions) and a Virtual Gravity (both box fnish). The current problem is that sometimes the Ogre Pearl is not strong enough but there is still not enough oil for the virtual gravity(although both balls would be playable with speed adjustments...). So I wanted anything in between because the virtual is not one but two steps up of the Ogre Pearl. A friend of mine bought the solid Ogre and the ball really is a beast @ 600 grit.

Now the problem is I also wanted to differentiate my arsenal in terms of differential, not only coverstock and I also really like the AMB-Core design + could maybe get the AMB at a great price

.

So my question is: How strong is the cover of the AMB-Solid? At the same grit-level, which one would be stronger, the ogre solid or the amb solid coverstock? With which one should I go?
I couldn't get my hands on the BTM-review of the AMB Solid so maybe if anyone can give me at least the numbers of this particular ball review?

With a solid ball in the middle of my arsenal I also wanted to bring down the virtual to 1000 abralon to make it a "real" heavy oil ball.

Another idea I had was going with the original Cell because it is "modern technology" but I am not sure about that? What are your thoughts? Is the AMB-Solid comparable to the cell in terms of oil handling (coverstock) although it is older?
Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks

scotts33 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 24, 2009, 12:32:33 PM »

charlest can make a comparison. I believe he drilled up a AMB Solid Centaur.
--------------------
Scott

abrown · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2009, 12:36:33 PM »

if your talking about the blue one then you may not want it it hooked around way more than the virtual i drilled for myself at 1000 grit you need lots of oil for that ball

scotts33 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 24, 2009, 12:38:19 PM »

quote:
if your talking about the blue one then you may not want it it hooked around way more than the virtual i drilled for myself at 1000 grit you need lots of oil for that ball

I think GuyGood is talking about the AMB Solid not the AMB Particle.
--------------------
Scott

GuyGood · « **Reply #4 on:** February 24, 2009, 12:41:04 PM »

Yes, I mean the red/pink /blue solid, not the AMB-particle. (This ball is just insane, I mean 320grit wet sanded particle^^ )

Nor Cal Bowler · « **Reply #5 on:** February 24, 2009, 12:47:10 PM »

Well the AMB Centaur Solid has the react-a-tact cover that is on the Frankie May too.
The Combo of the core and cover on this ball makes it a pretty strong hooking ball. I have thrown my friend's as I don't have one drilled up to fit me yet, but I was impressed...
--------------------
Visionary Test Staffer 08/09
www.visionarybowling.com

Nor Cal Bowler · « **Reply #6 on:** February 24, 2009, 12:52:21 PM »

Here is from the Visionary site...

..... the Pink/Blue CENTAUR-AMB (solid):

The solid AMB will get through the heads much easier than the particle AMB while still handling oil due to the React-A-Tack cover and the high flaring core. Although it won't handle nearly as heavy of oil as the Particle AMB, the Pink/Blue AMB solid provides a much stronger break on the backend.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------
Visionary Test Staffer 08/09
www.visionarybowling.com

GuyGood · « **Reply #7 on:** February 24, 2009, 01:38:43 PM »

@Nor Cal Bowler:
Of course I looked at the visionary homepage

But the information is not what I am looking for ( see my questions please

) but thanks for the input.
Edit: But what do you mean with impressed, maybe a bit more precise please? How strong was it compared to other balls of have?

Edited on 2/24/2009 2:46 PM

charlest · « **Reply #8 on:** February 24, 2009, 02:04:39 PM »

quote:
charlest can make a comparison. I believe he drilled up a AMB Solid Centaur.
--------------------
Scott

Sorry, Scott. Haven't drilled it yet. The Gladiator Pearl is almost too strong for the amount of oil I face. Can barely use the SX-1.

--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

rustylegacy · « **Reply #9 on:** February 24, 2009, 02:22:44 PM »

Im not sure which cover is stonger, but I had to stand deeper with the AMB than I did the ogre. Im kinda guessing it may have been core strength though. I get about 6" out of the AMB(with a weaker drilling), had 3" tops with the ogre. For me the AMB is much more angular, almost black widow or break solid kind of look. I kept the AMB and sold the ogre if that says anything. Both are very strong solids and needs oil or you start pinging 10 pins. AMB particle out hooks both buy alot.

GuyGood · « **Reply #10 on:** February 24, 2009, 03:52:46 PM »

quote:
almost black widow or break solid kind of look

Looking at the BTM-reviews both the Gladiator and Break and Cell got 8 "points" for Heavy and 8 for Medium Conditions and that is what I am looking for. So would you say that the coverstock is as strong as the Break for example (out of box of course)? How long do you have the ball, I guess it is pretty durable?

rustylegacy · « **Reply #11 on:** February 24, 2009, 05:33:07 PM »

I dont have the break solid, I do have the pearl which comes off the dry harder than the AMB. It has at least 350 games on it from me and I bought it used. Still going as strong as the 1st time I threw it. The cover sands and polishes VERY easily. Like I said its drilled weaker, 5 x 6 approx, so Im sure if it was drilled stronger it would probably pick up alot earlier. Ive had every AMB(all 3 centaurs and IP, sold IS) and have DC tour, the flare rings are much tighter on this ball compared to all the others which are very wide to start. This was my go to ball for 3 leagues last year. Ever since I got the Break pearl Ive been using that almost exclusively.

Nor Cal Bowler · « **Reply #12 on:** February 24, 2009, 08:06:32 PM »

quote:
Hi guys,

After being highly pleased with my Ogre Pearl I now need something stronger to complete my ball "arsenal". At the moment it is only the Ogre Pearl(, a pretty dead Storm Shift which I use for light/dry conditions) and a Virtual Gravity (both box fnish). The current problem is that sometimes the Ogre Pearl is not strong enough but there is still not enough oil for the virtual gravity(although both balls would be playable with speed adjustments...). So I wanted anything in between because the virtual is not one but two steps up of the Ogre Pearl. A friend of mine bought the solid Ogre and the ball really is a beast @ 600 grit.

Now the problem is I also wanted to differentiate my arsenal in terms of differential, not only coverstock and I also really like the AMB-Core design + could maybe get the AMB at a great price .

So my question is: How strong is the cover of the AMB-Solid? At the same grit-level, which one would be stronger, the ogre solid or the amb solid coverstock? With which one should I go?

Its hard to answer that. Both have entirely different cores. Like I said the Frankie May and Centaur solid are both the same cover (React-a-tact). As a guess I would say the React-a-tact cover would be stronger.

I couldn't get my hands on the BTM-review of the AMB Solid so maybe if anyone can give me at least the numbers of this particular ball review?

With a solid ball in the middle of my arsenal I also wanted to bring down the virtual to 1000 abralon to make it a "real" heavy oil ball.

Another idea I had was going with the original Cell because it is "modern technology" but I am not sure about that? What are your thoughts? Is the AMB-Solid comparable to the cell in terms of oil handling (coverstock) although it is older?
Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks

Another option is if you were thinking about a Cell, then you can go with a Gladiator Solid. To me the Gladiator Solid is right there with the Cell but just a tad weaker.

What are your stats anyways??
--------------------
Visionary Test Staffer 08/09
www.visionarybowling.com

Edited on 2/24/2009 9:08 PM

GuyGood · « **Reply #13 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:22:37 AM »

I also thought about the Gladiator, it is just that I saw a pretty cheap AMB-Solid offer online (40 Dollars less than Gladiator) and my local pro-shop does not carry Visionary so I have to buy online + i like the no-wrap and AMB-Core idea

My stats...hehe, maybe I really should fill my profile ^^
The problem is that I have never measured all important elements of my game but my PAP is 5 or 5 1/4 or 5 1/2 to the right and 1/2 to 1 up, tracking pretty high, close or maybe even over the thumb hole (inital track sometimes). Right Handed, don't know about the speed, tweener-style I would say and about 300-400 revs? Something like that.

Accidentally, I am bowling on CATS tomorrow and will add my stats to my profile.

Edited on 2/25/2009 10:23 AM

Nor Cal Bowler · « **Reply #14 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:46:54 AM »

Yeah that would be helpful.

--------------------
Visionary Test Staffer 08/09
www.visionarybowling.com

Author Topic: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions (Read 1634 times)

GuyGood

CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

scotts33

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

abrown

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

scotts33

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

GuyGood

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

Nor Cal Bowler

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

Nor Cal Bowler

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

GuyGood

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

charlest

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

rustylegacy

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

GuyGood

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

rustylegacy

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

Nor Cal Bowler

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

GuyGood

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions

Nor Cal Bowler

Re: CENTAUR-AMB Solid Questions