Jason...

I would love to see the return of the old DC blocks with the new covers, especially Eradicator Pearl.

Are those Weightblocks still legal to use? (RG Diff)
--------------------
Andrew Phillips

The Tenpin Bowling Discount Store - Moonah Bowl

Team Bowling Balls Australia - Visionary Staff

Thanks Jason for the quick reply. Don't need the exact specs for the ball, was just looking for a little background on the ball. Like MI 2 AZ stated, have heard it referred to as a great benchmark ball. Our house is notorious for putting out the heaviest shot around here, but I didn't pick up the Warlock to combat those conditions. My heavy-oil bag contains an AMB Particle and a Midnight Scorcher. I NEVER have to worry if my ball is gonna make it to the pocket or not! Thanks again for taking time out of your busy schedule to respond to my question.


Spike

Hi Charlest,

Thank you for the input.  I know that in theory, what you are describing is exactly what is supposed to happen, but thus far I haven't really seen that in our testing.  I guess it is possible that we simply haven't tested the right balls yet, but I usually try to find what I hear is the most popular ball at the time, and try to see what it is doing that makes it stand out.  

Unfortunately, or fortunately (depending on how you look at it), I find that what makes the ball so popular is often times not the reaction, but the hype behind it.  

Have you tried the FM Signature Gryphon?  While the cover isn't the same as the Ogre, they have similar characteristics, and if anything the React-A-Tack cover is a little stronger overall than the Eradicator.  This would give you the med. RG and higher diff that you are describing in your post.


Hi Shelley,

We have tested the particle pearls with many different surface preperations, but we typically just try to mimic the surface prep on what are considered the more popular balls.  We still use the old method of hand sanding on a spinner, so it's a little tough for us to exactly duplicate other manufacturers surfaces, but I think our 1,000 matte surface is fairly comparable to other companies who use resurfacing machines with abralon.  We have tested balls using abralon vs sandpaper vs scotch brite, and at this point we don't feel the abralon gives enough benefit to outweigh the difference in cost.

That being said, even though 1,000 grit seems like it should be the same throughout all types of pads, different sandpapers and different pads produce varied surfaces.  Typically, when a sandpaper is describing the grit, it is determined by the amount of abrasive mineral that can pass through a mesh screen with specific size openings.  However, that doesn't take into account what type of abrasive material is being used.  For example, 1,000 grit aluminum oxide sandpaper will give you a different finish than 1,000 grit silicon carbide, which again will be different from 1,000 grit garnet sandpaper.

I do agree with you about the scuffed balls vs polished balls though.  A 1,000 grit scuffed ball will react differently than a 1000 grit polished ball, especially in the carrydown.

Hey Androo,

How are things down under?  The DC core would no longer be legal to put in a ball.  The RG Differential exceeds the new limits, so the USBC would reject any new submission that we sent to them.

Jason Wonders
Visionary Bowling Products

Jason, as to your coverstock and particle pearl questions, mild/med carrydown is where the new oil absorbing coverstocks really make a difference in my game. Being able to use a polished cover allows me to stay in one area of the lane longer without having to move left for fresh heads/backs as if I were using a ball with surface, especially on longer patterns. I have seen several times when these balls have given me area that only others using the same type equipment (GB covers) had.
Hope this helps.
Joe

PS. I have no problem with a ball that only lasts 50-100 games, if it provides a competitive advantage. I just wish those companies that produce them would be a little more forthright about it.

Edited on 8/14/2007 12:36 PM

Hi Tommy,

It would really depend on your bowling style.  I am assuming that you have a higher rev rate because you threw the G/B Centaur in there for drier lanes?  Shoot me an email at vbpadvertising@aol.com, and we can go over stuff in detail.

Hi Joe,

When you are speaking of these balls, I assume you are talking about the soakers/oil absorbing covers and not particle pearls correct?  I am also guessing that you are a tournament/better scratch league bowler?

I can understand why this could be benificial for someone who bowls quite a few tournaments, if the ball gives them an advantage.  A ball can pay for itself in a week if it is good enough, but personally, and this is just my opinion, I would rather throw a ball that I knew I would still use a year from now, than have one that is going to be useless in 4-6 weeks.

I think part of what makes a great bowler, is knowing your equipment, and that's gotta be pretty tough if you have to turn it over 3-4 times per season.  Don't get me wrong, if it does something different, and gives a competitive advantage to someone, I want to make sure our customers have it as well, but I would try to find a way to get this without sacrificing longevity.

For those of you who have thrown a fair amount of our equipment, is there a ball out there that stands out above our equipment?  Obviously, if there is a concensus amongst a large number of bowlers, I want to know about it so that I can produce something to fill that void.  We just don't like to release new balls, just so that we have a new ball on the market.  I would love to release a particle pearl, but if I am going to add particles to a ball and shorten it's lifespan, I want to know that it is going to be what bowlers want.

Jason Wonders
Visionary Bowling Products

Edited on 8/14/2007 1:02 PM