Board index » Mo & Friends » General Discussion


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.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 8:17 am Post Number: #1 Post
Offline
BCU Graduate Layouts
User avatar

Joined: February 13, 2011
Posts: 869
Location: pasco wa
Reputation: 131
Reputation Power: 2
What do we know about the motion hole? Creates more assymetry, while keeping the drilling angle similar. So whats the difference between this, and just drilling an assym with a large drilling angle? For me, the magic has been experimenting with lower diff balls, and or longer or shorter pin to paps. Most assyms, are higher diff cores. What are others experiences using variances in lower diff motion hole layouts? How would you compare your motion hole ball with an assym with large drilling angle?

_________________
Please click the Green Button, If i have been helpful..


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 1:51 pm Post Number: #2 Post
Offline
BCU Graduate Layouts

Joined: January 24, 2012
Posts: 414
Reputation: 51
Reputation Power: 1
I've mostly used it on medium to large diff syms, so I'm not much help there. I did put a couple in asyms with large drill angles to get the cg where I needed. My results were not good. Way too much length on a assym, even with a lot of surface.

I'm curious though as to how short a pin to pap you've experimented with. I thought you were supposed to keep the pin to pap in the 3-4" range. What ranges have you tried? What have been the results?

_________________
James Talley


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 2:54 pm Post Number: #3 Post
Offline
Certified Coach

Joined: February 15, 2016
Posts: 490
Reputation: 78
Reputation Power: 1
Bill Sempsrott, the owner of BTM Digital Media wrote an article for BTM entitled, "Bowling Ball Balance Hole Fundamentals." He has included ball motion simulation videos for each of his many examples. They are quite revealing. Bill is the developer of the Powerhouse Blueprint ball motion simulator and has a graduate degree in Mechanical Engineering. He knows what he is talking about!


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 3:22 pm Post Number: #4 Post
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2007
Posts: 3902
Location: Malta, NY
Reputation: 861
Reputation Power: 9
I have used it only on symmetricals Russ.
I've found its not as sharp as advertised due to the inertia is has to overcome.
Its pretty deceiving, because when you look at the differential ratio its extremely high, so you'd think it would transition to roll very quickly, but it doesnt.

Important: Most of the effect is on the pin deck. Consider the bit size on the hole to be additional leverage at the pins.
Some people need more leverage than others.
The inertia, once overcome to produce good entry angle, deflects less when the pins offer resistance.
It makes a 15lbs ball hit like a 17lbs ball when tuned just right.
To get maximum effect, you need to get it right, dont go too big! Split the 8-9 on flush hits, then STOP tuning!
I find to overcome the additional inertia, this layout needs more ball surface than you're accustomed to, so use a ball with an aggressive cover to start, but top shelf isnt necessary. I just wouldnt put this on urethane or entry level covers.

Due to the long hook phase I do not like this layout on sport conditions. Its good for a very short period of time.

_________________
Please press the Image button if you feel I've been helpful.

“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 6:03 pm Post Number: #5 Post
Offline
Trusted Source

Joined: January 18, 2010
Posts: 3036
Reputation: 433
Reputation Power: 5
russelldean wrote:
What do we know about the motion hole? Creates more assymetry, while keeping the drilling angle similar. So whats the difference between this, and just drilling an assym with a large drilling angle? For me, the magic has been experimenting with lower diff balls, and or longer or shorter pin to paps. Most assyms, are higher diff cores. What are others experiences using variances in lower diff motion hole layouts? How would you compare your motion hole ball with an assym with large drilling angle?

That is what I am seeing. You make a symmetrical ball more asymmetrical. Many of the bowlers that have wanted a motion hole in an asymmetrical ball, have thrown the ball before the hole & decided not to add the hole. It usually already has the reaction they were looking for due to the large drilling angle with small VAL angle. The rev up seems to be much more noticeable on low rev bowlers, so they are the ones who really like the hole. High rev players are not that impressed. I just put a Motion hole on a black hammer for a 2 hander and he has to have very dry lanes to get any reaction at all out of the ball now. Pin to PAPs still follow the flare rules. I have done a lot of experimenting on this also.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 6:06 pm Post Number: #6 Post
Offline
Trusted Source

Joined: January 18, 2010
Posts: 3036
Reputation: 433
Reputation Power: 5
RobMautner wrote:
Bill Sempsrott, the owner of BTM Digital Media wrote an article for BTM entitled, "Bowling Ball Balance Hole Fundamentals." He has included ball motion simulation videos for each of his many examples. They are quite revealing. Bill is the developer of the Powerhouse Blueprint ball motion simulator and has a graduate degree in Mechanical Engineering. He knows what he is talking about!

Guess I will have to purchase BTM.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 8:08 pm Post Number: #7 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: January 18, 2010
Posts: 865
Location: Northern California
Reputation: 19
Reputation Power: 1
Has he done any of the blueprint experiments with a motion hole? I did it with the demo and it did show a considerable difference between a ball without the motion hole. In my experiment the results were very similar to a ball with high top weight without the motion hole, so I'm not sure if the hole changing the core dynamics is what creates the motion or if it is the increased topweight (decreased bottom weight)... maybe a bit of both??

I was surprised how he said in the article that the flare increasing weight hole moved the cg and as a result reduced the hook of an already high flaring ball. I would think that it might have been the hole created more asymmetry, so that the ball read the friction quicker, created a shorter hook zone, and got into a roll sooner.

_________________
Right Handed, 18 -19 mph off hand (16 - 17 mph on Qubica reading) ,350 rpm,PAP 4 3/4 x 1/4 up, 17 deg axis tilt, varied rotational axis deg.. usually 45+
Book Average 220+


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2016 1:52 am Post Number: #8 Post
Offline
BCU Graduate Layouts
User avatar

Joined: June 5, 2010
Posts: 851
Reputation: 77
Reputation Power: 1
elgavachon wrote:
Guess I will have to purchase BTM.


The article was a very light version of what Blueprint has posted on this site already (and is posted in the Wiki). Nice read but very brief.

_________________
* MPH @ aarows
* RPM
AR *
AT *
PAP 3 3/4"
(* rebuilding)

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.”
― Neil deGrasse Tyson


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2016 4:18 am Post Number: #9 Post
Offline
BCU Graduate Layouts
User avatar

Joined: February 13, 2011
Posts: 869
Location: pasco wa
Reputation: 131
Reputation Power: 2
My favorite's so far, are balls that flare only 2-4". If I use a higher diff(40 plus) it acts to much like an asym. I just drilled a fire Quantum(.55 diff I believe) and did a 5 1/2 pin to pap. I used 1000 abralon to get it started. Reads the mids great, and gets the corners out when I don't expect it. Even when I miss it with my hand a bit, it just keeps going. Also a 2" pin to pap is very Interesting. That nice early arcing motion with continuation you don't expect. I can actually go away with it a bit. Eric....I love the Motionhole on broken down sport. Not to open the lane up, but square up, shut my angles down, and firm up. Almost like playing fallback again. Once again, the benefit to me here is a more asymetrical drilled ball with a lower diff.

_________________
Please click the Green Button, If i have been helpful..


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2016 4:29 am Post Number: #10 Post
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2007
Posts: 3902
Location: Malta, NY
Reputation: 861
Reputation Power: 9
russelldean wrote:
My favorite's so far, are balls that flare only 2-4". If I use a higher diff(40 plus) it acts to much like an asym. I just drilled a fire Quantum(.55 diff I believe) and did a 5 1/2 pin to pap. I used 1000 abralon to get it started. Reads the mids great, and gets the corners out when I don't expect it. Even when I miss it with my hand a bit, it just keeps going. Also a 2" pin to pap is very Interesting. That nice early arcing motion with continuation you don't expect. I can actually go away with it a bit. Eric....I love the Motionhole on broken down sport. Not to open the lane up, but square up, shut my angles down, and firm up. Almost like playing fallback again. Once again, the benefit to me here is a more asymetrical drilled ball with a lower diff.


Russ,

Good to see you're trying different things out there.
I've tried my Motion Hole Yeti Uncaged on sport (135 x 3 x 45) @ 800 abralon and its still touchy.
I have 17-20* of tilt, so the window for the ball to roll is already small. This layout makes the ball hook longer, you can see my dilemma. I think its great when you can feed it as much friction as it needs to turn over. Tough to find that on sport without going into the flattest parts of the pattern.
I can break down a pattern with my Guru Mighty 25 x 5 x 40 @ 500 abralon, when it starts hooking too early I bring out the Yeti Uncaged, it looks amazing for 5 frames then starts wiggling. Weird. I just avoid it if I can. Its tempting with the carry, but you cant carry if you cant find the pocket.

_________________
Please press the Image button if you feel I've been helpful.

“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:37 pm Post Number: #11 Post
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: August 11, 2014
Posts: 434
Reputation: 62
Reputation Power: 1
This thread is very helpful, and timely. I've drilled my last few symmetricals thinking I would try a Motion Hole - but I like the reactions well enough that I just haven't bothered. Primo Solid, Jackpot, Rack Attack Solid.

I still have a couple others to experiment with - Primo (pearl), Sigma Sting, Yeti Untamed, IQ Tour Solid.

Given the strong differentials on the first 3, perhaps the IQ Tour is the best candidate? The Rack Attack Solid and Arson Low Flare Pearl could also be interesting.

Thanks,

Steve

_________________
18-19 mph (15.5-16.5 on monitor), 375 rpm, PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8 up, AT: 12*, AR: 45*


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 6:22 am Post Number: #12 Post
Offline
BCU Graduate Layouts
User avatar

Joined: February 13, 2011
Posts: 869
Location: pasco wa
Reputation: 131
Reputation Power: 2
Good luck Steve. Let us know what you find.

_________________
Please click the Green Button, If i have been helpful..


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:57 pm Post Number: #13 Post
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: February 28, 2011
Posts: 498
Location: Houston, TX
Reputation: 88
Reputation Power: 1
If the intent of the Motion Hole is to increase the differential, I would believe a ball with that potential already in it would be the best candidate. (Correct me if I am wrong)

If we look at two balls with the same cover, then a ball with a higher differential would most likely provide the wider range of intermediate differentials with varying sizes of Motion Holes. And if this is the case, the a Rocket Ship might be a better option than the IQ Tour since both balls have R2S solid on them.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 3:41 pm Post Number: #14 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: January 18, 2010
Posts: 865
Location: Northern California
Reputation: 19
Reputation Power: 1
spmcgivern wrote:
If the intent of the Motion Hole is to increase the differential, I would believe a ball with that potential already in it would be the best candidate. (Correct me if I am wrong)

If we look at two balls with the same cover, then a ball with a higher differential would most likely provide the wider range of intermediate differentials with varying sizes of Motion Holes. And if this is the case, the a Rocket Ship might be a better option than the IQ Tour since both balls have R2S solid on them.


I believe the MOtion hole isn't necessarily about increasing the differential. You can do that more with other weight holes. When it was first introduced on here, they said it was more about changing the core shape. The voids created by the weight hole and the (close to opposite side ) MOtion hole increases the "gyroscopic inertia". Which resulted in continuation and better "hit" through the pins.

Check out this thread

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=7374&hilit=MOtion+hole&start=160

_________________
Right Handed, 18 -19 mph off hand (16 - 17 mph on Qubica reading) ,350 rpm,PAP 4 3/4 x 1/4 up, 17 deg axis tilt, varied rotational axis deg.. usually 45+
Book Average 220+


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 3:55 pm Post Number: #15 Post
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: April 26, 2007
Posts: 3902
Location: Malta, NY
Reputation: 861
Reputation Power: 9
A science video showing how gyroscopes work with angular momentum.


_________________
Please press the Image button if you feel I've been helpful.

“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:31 pm Post Number: #16 Post
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: August 11, 2014
Posts: 434
Reputation: 62
Reputation Power: 1
russelldean wrote:
Good luck Steve. Let us know what you find.


Thanks, and I will definitely let you know.

I think I'll try an IQ Tour Solid and a Hammer Arson Low Flare Solid. These are both balls that I use often, and am very familiar with their characteristics. I can do some actual side by side comparisons. Start with the lower flaring equipment, and then try something stronger as well.

Steve

_________________
18-19 mph (15.5-16.5 on monitor), 375 rpm, PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8 up, AT: 12*, AR: 45*


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:45 am Post Number: #17 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: August 7, 2012
Posts: 68
Location: Richmond, Va.
Reputation: 0
Reputation Power: 1
I have done 3 MoTion Holes for myself and plotting 2 more (One Sym and One Asym) and 6 for customers in my shop. From my experience I liked it the Shatter I drilled it in which was a mid RG and Diff ball with a weaker shell (2.55 RG and .042 Diff) way more than the Modern Marvel with much stronger cover and Lower RG (2.49 RG and .048 Diff) and Torrid Affair (2.48 RG and .048 Diff). With my higher Axis Rotation, I felt as thought I saw the asymmetry very well as I watched both balls "rev up" sooner than without the Hole. However, I think I should stick to the design of the ball as I liked both the lower RG balls without the hole.

It seemed like the hook zone was too short once the holes were drilled and found myself having the same problem I do with most asyms where they burn up and roll out, eventhough the hole is designed studied to give you the breakpoint that is later. I believe that in the Modern Marvel the cover was too strong and not a good choice for the hole. The Torrid Affair was just too smooth downlane and I guess I was spoiled by the board coverage I got from the Shatter.

The Shatter was a reaction I had never seen before or after. It allowed me to chase in when normally everything on the dry house patterns would burn and puke if too strong or never make the corner if too weak. Until I drilled it, I would have to move to a weaker ball and move left. This isn't a problem, however its rather fun to be able to chase in and be in an area most lefties cant get to. It also allowed me to play on certain sport patterns of moderate difficulty where middle of the lane was torched.

Since then, for my customers I've done 2 Meanstreak Brawlers, Viral Solid, 2 Ridiculous and Berserk. All of which the customers enjoy and the most impressive to me was the Viral Solid in which the Customer saw 9 boards of separation from No hole to 1 1/8" hole.

I'm a fan of doing it in Mid Performance mild covered balls (of course with Radially Symmetric cores). I wouldn't do it in super strong symmetricals because most are designed to read the oil pattern earlier and you are, with the hole, trying to make the ball transition later. Asyms I have not experimented with but am interested in experimenting with a ball like the Snap Lock or Hyper Cell Skid. IMO, balls that maybe a little more suited to see more of a separation from start to finish and have the weaker shells to support the layout for me.

_________________
James C. Jones, Innovative Bowling Products Certified Pro Shop Operator
Orbdrillers Pro Shop, Petersburg, Virginia
Local IBEW 666, Journeyman Wireman
Rev Dominant, Lefty
16.5 mph, 300 rpms, 12* of Tilt, PAP: 5.5" left x 1" up


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:13 pm Post Number: #18 Post
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: August 11, 2014
Posts: 434
Reputation: 62
Reputation Power: 1
I thought I'd start with an IQ tour, but I don't think I got the static weights close enough to make it work. Although I put the CG near the palm, I ended up with 0.7 oz finger weight, and 0.6 oz of RF side weight.

It's a byproduct of an existing finger plug, and my left lateral thumb pitch. I almost always check the CG before I layout a plugged ball, but in this case I just plain forgot!

Using the standard layout, the motion hole would be right on the midline, and just off the center line. It's actually in a nice flare-safe area, but not in a good location for the finger/side weight issues. I'm unsure if I can improve it enough with a deep RF or just pick another candidate and start over. I suppose I can just drill it and deal with static legality if it actually is an issue.

Although I'm a low-tilt/high-track bowler, I've been using lower flaring layouts on all my symmetricals because the reaction has been much better for me than the higher flaring stuff. A different pin position would shift the hole slightly, but it's the static weight and not the location that are my issue.

Here's a picture of what I am dealing with. Any ideas appreciated!

Attachment:
iq-motion-layout.jpg


Steve


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
18-19 mph (15.5-16.5 on monitor), 375 rpm, PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8 up, AT: 12*, AR: 45*


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:39 pm Post Number: #19 Post
Offline
Trusted Source

Joined: January 18, 2010
Posts: 3036
Reputation: 433
Reputation Power: 5
stevespo wrote:
I thought I'd start with an IQ tour, but I don't think I got the static weights close enough to make it work. Although I put the CG near the palm, I ended up with 0.7 oz finger weight, and 0.6 oz of RF side weight.

It's a byproduct of an existing finger plug, and my left lateral thumb pitch. I almost always check the CG before I layout a plugged ball, but in this case I just plain forgot!

Using the standard layout, the motion hole would be right on the midline, and just off the center line. It's actually in a nice flare-safe area, but not in a good location for the finger/side weight issues. I'm unsure if I can improve it enough with a deep RF or just pick another candidate and start over. I suppose I can just drill it and deal with static legality if it actually is an issue.

Although I'm a low-tilt/high-track bowler, I've been using lower flaring layouts on all my symmetricals because the reaction has been much better for me than the higher flaring stuff. A different pin position would shift the hole slightly, but it's the static weight and not the location that are my issue.

Here's a picture of what I am dealing with. Any ideas appreciated!

Attachment:
iq-motion-layout.jpg


Steve

When I have done that, I have shortened the distance to the hole and pitched it. Still seems to give the rev up.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Motion hole experiments
 Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2016 8:14 am Post Number: #20 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: August 25, 2015
Posts: 142
Reputation: 23
Reputation Power: 1
Any Pro bowlers using motion hole to tweak their balls ?

_________________
Chris


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » Mo & Friends » General Discussion


 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: