The TRUTH About Top Weight
Moderators: Mo Pinel, purduepaul, MathIsTruth, ballspinner
Forum rules
Ask Mo Pinel and the bowling industry's best your questions, and get straight answers.
This forum is moderated exclusively by Mo & Friends.
Ask Mo Pinel and the bowling industry's best your questions, and get straight answers.
This forum is moderated exclusively by Mo & Friends.
-
- Member
- Posts: 502
- Joined: February 11th, 2011, 9:36 pm
- THS Average: 203
- Positive Axis Point: 4 7/8 right x 1 up
- Speed: 20 off hand
- Rev Rate: 360
- Axis Tilt: 10
- Axis Rotation: 55
- Preferred Company: Radical, Storm, Motiv
The TRUTH About Top Weight
Ok now that my subject title got your attention please consider this:
If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?
Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.
Why is that?
If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?
Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.
Why is that?
Rev rate ~ 350
Speed 17.5 at foul line
Tilt 8*
Rotation ~ 55*
PAP 4 1/4 right x 1 up
Speed 17.5 at foul line
Tilt 8*
Rotation ~ 55*
PAP 4 1/4 right x 1 up
-
- BCU Graduate Layouts
- Posts: 477
- Joined: January 24th, 2012, 11:02 pm
- Positive Axis Point: 4 1/2 Left x 3/4 Up
- Speed: 18.5 off Hand
- Rev Rate: 350
- Axis Tilt: 17
- Axis Rotation: 55
- Heavy Oil Ball: Guru Mighty
- Medium Oil Ball: Guru
- Light Oil Ball: Torrid Affair
- Preferred Company: Radical
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Do you mean finger weight or top weight? The USBC Ball Motion Study placed Finger/Thumb Weight next to last in influence of the variables they tested. Right between Room Temp and Lane Temp. Top weight was just above Room Temp, so still not very influential.mattypizon wrote:Ok now that my subject title got your attention please consider this:
If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?
Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.
Why is that?
James Talley
- snick
- BCU Graduate Layouts
- Posts: 759
- Joined: August 31st, 2014, 8:00 pm
- THS Average: 196
- Sport Average: 180
- Positive Axis Point: 5.5625" x .625 up
- Speed: 17 off hand
- Rev Rate: 360
- Axis Tilt: 17
- Axis Rotation: 55
- Heavy Oil Ball: Storm Physix
- Medium Oil Ball: Storm Streetfight
- Light Oil Ball: Rotogrip Hustle Pearl
- Preferred Company: Rotogrip
- Location: Tucson, AZ
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
I usually spin my layouts on a ball spinner in various orientations before drilling.
Not sure what effects (statics vs core) I'm seeing here, but the layouts that spin smoothest on my PAP are usually my favorites after drilling.
Not sure what effects (statics vs core) I'm seeing here, but the layouts that spin smoothest on my PAP are usually my favorites after drilling.
Benchmark Bowling Pro Shop
Byron
RH
PAP: 5.5625 x .625 up
REVRATE: 360
SPEED: 17mph at release
AR: 55º
AT: 17º
Byron
RH
PAP: 5.5625 x .625 up
REVRATE: 360
SPEED: 17mph at release
AR: 55º
AT: 17º
-
- Member
- Posts: 657
- Joined: November 22nd, 2014, 6:07 am
- THS Average: 205
- Positive Axis Point: 5 5/8 up 3/4
- Speed: 14 mph off hand
- Rev Rate: 300
- Axis Tilt: 15
- Axis Rotation: 60
- Location: Hong Kong
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Interesting. Please tell me how you do that.snick wrote:I usually spin my layouts on a ball spinner in various orientations before drilling.
Not sure what effects (statics vs core) I'm seeing here, but the layouts that spin smoothest on my PAP are usually my favorites after drilling.
Adrian
Right handed
PAP: 5 1/8 up 3/4
Speed: 15.5 mph (Kegel Specto)
Rev: 350 RPM
Axis tilt: 18-20*
Axis rotation: 60*
Right handed
PAP: 5 1/8 up 3/4
Speed: 15.5 mph (Kegel Specto)
Rev: 350 RPM
Axis tilt: 18-20*
Axis rotation: 60*
- Mo Pinel
- Rest In Peace
- Posts: 10054
- Joined: January 26th, 2010, 6:10 pm
- Preferred Company: MoRich, & now RADICAL BT
- Location: Richmond, VA
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Here's the fact. Changing from full max. negative statics to full max. positive statics will alter ball reaction 7.8% That's math, not opinion.mattypizon wrote:Ok now that my subject title got your attention please consider this:
If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?
Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.
Why is that?
Rest In Peace (1942-2021)
-
- Member
- Posts: 502
- Joined: February 11th, 2011, 9:36 pm
- THS Average: 203
- Positive Axis Point: 4 7/8 right x 1 up
- Speed: 20 off hand
- Rev Rate: 360
- Axis Tilt: 10
- Axis Rotation: 55
- Preferred Company: Radical, Storm, Motiv
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Haha that's awesome!!
But is that Common Core math?
But is that Common Core math?
Rev rate ~ 350
Speed 17.5 at foul line
Tilt 8*
Rotation ~ 55*
PAP 4 1/4 right x 1 up
Speed 17.5 at foul line
Tilt 8*
Rotation ~ 55*
PAP 4 1/4 right x 1 up
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Mo Pinel wrote:
Here's the fact. Changing from full max. negative statics to full max. positive statics will alter ball reaction 7.8% That's math, not opinion.
Static weights have less effect on balls that flare because what starts out as side weight moves 90 degrees off side weight if the ball flares 6+ inches.
Since the ball doesn't flare the same amount for everyone, I doubt you can set a hard number such as 7.8%.
- rrb6699
- Member
- Posts: 797
- Joined: June 22nd, 2013, 12:24 am
- THS Average: 235
- Sport Average: 211
- Positive Axis Point: 4 ovr, 1 up
- Speed: 12-18.5 mph at pin deck
- Rev Rate: 360
- Axis Tilt: 15
- Axis Rotation: 65
- Heavy Oil Ball: 15#-Incognito, Obsession Sld, Altered Reality, Astrophyx Prl
- Medium Oil Ball: 16# Quantum Violet, Honey Badger Rev, Venom Shock
- Light Oil Ball: 15#: StarTrak Ureth -Sky Blue
- Preferred Company: Radical, Storm/Roto, Brunswk
- Location: Central Florida
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
ive always noticed some differences with top, finger/thumb, side weights.
just to approach this logically you would have to use a ball or balls with identical cores and same surfaces:
take ball 1 and set it up with 0 finger and thumb weights. if you could, and 0 top and bottom weights.
drill it with one ounce positive side weight then ball 2 with one ounce negative side weight. then tell me theres no difference in those two balls. do the same thing by isolating top/bottom weights and then finger/thumb weights.
the first thing you will notice before you throw the ball is how it rests on your hand wrist facing up with the side weights and finger and thumb weights. not so much with the top/bottom weights since that is pretty much centered.
I believe you will see a noticable direction of roll variance between the side weights. slightly less but noticable difference between finger and thumb weights. then less with top and bottom weights depending on how you release it.
now, I also agree ball coverstock/surface, core/layout relative to bowler's specs overcome a high percentage of the affects of static weights but for those same reasons (I would say coverstock/surface mostly) also amplify the affects of certain static weights.
the reason I believe this is I have bowled with balls at max static weights before -- and I have video to show this-- on my Guru Master at initial drilling it ended up with 1oz of finger weight. dont laugh it had 3.9oz top wt before drilling and ended up with 1oz finger after drilling for the layout I wanted. Well, someone mis-read my instructions and thought I wanted a P3 hole in it and to my surprise thats what I got. that put it at 2oz finger.
I decided to throw it and video it before plugging the P3 and drilling the fingers deep enough to bring the finger weight to just over 1/2oz now.
ill post the videos once I get a computer up and running again. overall it seems the more oil on the lane the more the finger weight made a difference. but on it reading friction, the ball's characteristics seem similar.
just what I observed in this instance.
rr
just to approach this logically you would have to use a ball or balls with identical cores and same surfaces:
take ball 1 and set it up with 0 finger and thumb weights. if you could, and 0 top and bottom weights.
drill it with one ounce positive side weight then ball 2 with one ounce negative side weight. then tell me theres no difference in those two balls. do the same thing by isolating top/bottom weights and then finger/thumb weights.
the first thing you will notice before you throw the ball is how it rests on your hand wrist facing up with the side weights and finger and thumb weights. not so much with the top/bottom weights since that is pretty much centered.
I believe you will see a noticable direction of roll variance between the side weights. slightly less but noticable difference between finger and thumb weights. then less with top and bottom weights depending on how you release it.
now, I also agree ball coverstock/surface, core/layout relative to bowler's specs overcome a high percentage of the affects of static weights but for those same reasons (I would say coverstock/surface mostly) also amplify the affects of certain static weights.
the reason I believe this is I have bowled with balls at max static weights before -- and I have video to show this-- on my Guru Master at initial drilling it ended up with 1oz of finger weight. dont laugh it had 3.9oz top wt before drilling and ended up with 1oz finger after drilling for the layout I wanted. Well, someone mis-read my instructions and thought I wanted a P3 hole in it and to my surprise thats what I got. that put it at 2oz finger.
I decided to throw it and video it before plugging the P3 and drilling the fingers deep enough to bring the finger weight to just over 1/2oz now.
ill post the videos once I get a computer up and running again. overall it seems the more oil on the lane the more the finger weight made a difference. but on it reading friction, the ball's characteristics seem similar.
just what I observed in this instance.
rr
- Qman
- Member
- Posts: 548
- Joined: October 15th, 2012, 5:14 pm
- THS Average: 185
- Positive Axis Point: 4 1/8 1/2 up
- Rev Rate: 280
- Axis Tilt: 23
- Axis Rotation: 20
- Heavy Oil Ball: Roto Grip Sinister
- Medium Oil Ball: IQ Tour Solid
- Light Oil Ball: Rack Attack Pearl
- Preferred Company: Radical/Storm/Roto Grip
- Location: Montevideo Minnesota
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
I look at top weight and pin length to determine what best fits my needs. Longer pins 3-5, top weight 2.5 to 3.5 max. Am I close to what is average?
Adapt or perish!
PAP 4 1/8, 1/2 up
Axis Rotation 20
Axis Tilt 23
Rev rate 280
Speed Dominate / Rev Challenged
14-16mph at monitor
PAP 4 1/8, 1/2 up
Axis Rotation 20
Axis Tilt 23
Rev rate 280
Speed Dominate / Rev Challenged
14-16mph at monitor
- MegaMav
- Moderator
- Posts: 4694
- Joined: April 27th, 2007, 5:00 am
- THS Average: 225
- Sport Average: 200
- Positive Axis Point: 5.5 Over & 1 Up
- Speed: 16.0 MPH - Camera
- Rev Rate: 375
- Axis Tilt: 14
- Axis Rotation: 45
- Heavy Oil Ball: Radical - Informer
- Medium Oil Ball: Brunswick - Fearless
- Light Oil Ball: Radical - Bonus Pearl
- Preferred Company: Radical Bowling Technologies
- Location: Malta, NY
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Why dont you put a number or a range on it then?MWhite wrote: Since the ball doesn't flare the same amount for everyone, I doubt you can set a hard number such as 7.8%.
I hope you read the USBC ball motion study.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- Mo Pinel
- Rest In Peace
- Posts: 10054
- Joined: January 26th, 2010, 6:10 pm
- Preferred Company: MoRich, & now RADICAL BT
- Location: Richmond, VA
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
That # is a mathematical calculation of how far the center of mass can be moved within a ball compared to how far the COM can be moved by using the allowable mass properties of the ball.MegaMav wrote:
Why dont you put a number or a range on it then?
I hope you read the USBC ball motion study.
Rest In Peace (1942-2021)
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
The USBC ball motion study is flawed, as far as I can tell, it does not take ball temp into consideration.
Also, a 7.8% swing is substantial when viewing the total distance the ball must travel, get to the pocket and strike. Top weight does several things, but most importantly, can create sustainable motion for certain types of bowlers.
Also, a 7.8% swing is substantial when viewing the total distance the ball must travel, get to the pocket and strike. Top weight does several things, but most importantly, can create sustainable motion for certain types of bowlers.
Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight
Mo Pinel wrote:
That # is a mathematical calculation of how far the center of mass can be moved within a ball compared to how far the COM can be moved by using the allowable mass properties of the ball.
There is a big difference between calculating how far the center of mass can be moved, and how much ball reaction will change.Mo Pinel wrote:Here's the fact. Changing from full max. negative statics to full max. positive statics will alter ball reaction 7.8% That's math, not opinion.
The ball motion study was at best an academic study, not based on real world conditions.
This gives the impression that they are interested in protecting the credibility of the sport of bowling.USBC wrote:The United States Bowling Congress, the national governing body of the sport of bowling, aims to ensure the integrity and protect the future of the sport by providing programs and services which enhance the bowling experience. Over the past twenty years, the technological advancements in bowling ball cover stocks and cores, coupled with improved lane surfaces and oiling patterns, have contributed to an increasing rate of honor scores and the overall scoring pace—thereby jeopardizing the credibility of the sport of bowling.
Great, oil the lanes in a way that doesn't represent the conditions where the increased rate of honor scores are being achieved.USBC wrote:The lanes for the testing were AMF HPL 9000 synthetic lanes. The tests were performed with the Kegel Standard Sanction lane machine using Kegel Defense/C lane cleaner and Kegel Offence HV lane conditioner. The lane pattern applied to the lane surface is comprised of six two to two loads oiled from the foul line to eight feet and then buffed out until forty-nine feet. What this means is that lane conditioner is applied evenly from the second board on the left to the second board on the right for eight feet and then buffed evenly until forty-nine feet. This means we have thirty units of lane conditioner at eight feet from the foul line, eight units of lane conditioner at thirty-two feet from the foul line, and five units at forty-seven feet which is two feet before the end of the oiling pattern.
Run the study on a THS (like 99% of the honor scores are shot on) and you will find the ball motion is significantly different.
But that might make the BPAA mad, and we know what happened last time the BPAA got mad.
Back in the 80/90's ABC/USBC should have protected the integrity of the sport rather than protect their paychecks.
If all the bowlers demanded walled up conditions, simply don't sanction the centers, and close the ABC/USBC doors, at least the records would still have meaning.