BowlingChat.net
http://forum.bowlingchat.net/

The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls
http://forum.bowlingchat.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=13967
Page 2 of 2

Author:  Pavel [ Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

MegaMav wrote:
Where the PAP migrates and how fast is significantly different between those Pin to PAP distances.
Treat the dual angle layout system as a sliding scale, not chunked up buckets of low, medium, high flare.

Drill angle to influence how early the ball revs up.
Pin to PAP distance on how fast or slow to burn off tilt and rotation.
VAL angle to control how long or short the hook zone is.

If you want a layout for your ball, contact a Hammer representative.
I am not familiar with their products.

Hi!
More flare means more volume of friction... the same flare is the same total volume of friction. Is it true? I mean the same bowling lane and the same ball... What does the speed of the PAPs migrate change ?
Larger a drill angle means longer the first phase (or the speed of the PAPs migrate influences on it? - how much and what way?) ....
The Guru bowling ball 110*1-1/2"60* showes the proper reaction ... Sum of angles 170* . The limits of the the dual angles system are 10-90* and 20-70* the sum limit is 160* but the ball works well... Does the thumb hole change the position the PSA on asym balls much? Mo says 'No'
Who knows answers? Nobody?
Pavel

Author:  gunso [ Fri Sep 14, 2018 7:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

I think Mo said somewhere that there was no need for going over the 90° drill angle with the new weight rules since you didn't nees to worry anymore about the cg placement.

I've also asked Mo about his studies about the pin to psa line and he states that he has done the research and talks about it in his new video but there is nothing in that video that proves or suggests the ball revs up faster after he crosses the pin to spin line.

https://youtu.be/2eCTVEQnIz4 here is another take on the issue from Storm. I'd understand there position as the strongest psa to pap distance would be 3 3/8. ubfortunstely there is no set drill angle that correlates to that psa position. Personally Storms system makes much more sense to me about the unstable position of the PSA rarher than some imaginery line of the pin to spin line until I'll see some research that supports that theory over the psa to pap theory

Author:  Arkansas [ Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

gunso wrote:
I'd understand there position as the strongest psa to pap distance would be 3 3/8. ubfortunstely there is no set drill angle that correlates to that psa position.


3 3/8" pin to psa would be a 45* drill angle. And if you reference the Track Flare Study in the wiki you'll see that 50* gave max flare in the study (they didn't show 45*).

Author:  gunso [ Mon Sep 17, 2018 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/images ... lAngle.pdf

Page 4 in the above link shows that a 3 3/8 PSA to PAP is not the same as a 45°drilling angle.

50° drilling angle would explain why longer pin to pap distances showed a higher amount of flare with longer pin to paps then short pin to paps since the PSA placement is stronger for the 50 drilling angle as you go to a longer pin.

This has been Storms selling point on their layout system that the dual angle doesn't always show the same PSA placement. Probably because I have yet to see them reference the pin to spin line that Mo preaches.

Author:  elgavachon [ Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

gunso wrote:
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/images/c/cd/DualAngle.pdf

Page 4 in the above link shows that a 3 3/8 PSA to PAP is not the same as a 45°drilling angle.

50° drilling angle would explain why longer pin to pap distances showed a higher amount of flare with longer pin to paps then short pin to paps since the PSA placement is stronger for the 50 drilling angle as you go to a longer pin.

This has been Storms selling point on their layout system that the dual angle doesn't always show the same PSA placement. Probably because I have yet to see them reference the pin to spin line that Mo preaches.

Mo developed Storm's layout system. He says he thinks the dual angle is more precise. Mo did the Storm system to teach pro shop operators how to drill the offset hammer in 93 if I remember right.

Author:  gunso [ Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

when I email Mo (i'm no thumb) he uses the psa to pap distance and asks me to swing arcs so he at least differs his methadology if people use a thumb or not when dealing with asyms for no thumbers

Author:  elgavachon [ Tue Sep 18, 2018 8:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

gunso wrote:
when I email Mo (i'm no thumb) he uses the psa to pap distance and asks me to swing arcs so he at least differs his methadology if people use a thumb or not when dealing with asyms for no thumbers

Ya I noticed that too. On Facebook. for no thumb he usually uses somewhere in 6" pin to PSA with less than 2 1/4" pin distance and a VAL of around 45* (he still uses VAL angle and not pin buffer).

Author:  gunso [ Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

I'm kinda interested in seeing how his recommendations will change now that the new static weight rules allow a little bit more flexibility in cg locations for no thumbers without balance holes. I thought he was a bit too focused on putting the cg in the ring finger with his old recommendations to avoid balance holes.

Also why he recommends the PSA to PAP instead of just 70°drilling angle which for the short pin layouts he usually recommends is at least close to that 6" psa to pap for those pin distances.

"Asyms are no problem, but we swing arcs from the pin and the PSA to do them. A take off on the current Storm method, which I wrote as "Matching up with Hammer" in 1997. I need the pin out and TW numbers from the Guru Master you have."

"Good pin for you. Put the cg in the Ring Finger. Put the pin above and right of the Ring Finger at a 60* angle to the vertical centerline of the grip. Drill the finger holes 4" deep. You'll like it."

"Drill it by swinging an arc 2" from the pin and an arc 6 1/4" from the PSA. Measure 7/8" up from the intersection of the arcs and connect that spot with the cg. Drill the fingers 4" deep. the cg should end up in the ring finger. Send me a picture of the layout before drilling to make sure it's right. Don't drill a thumb hole. NO balance hole!"

My roll on the ball had changed significantly between these 2 bowling balls which both had the Guru core, but my issue with his thoughts are that I'm not sure if he is more prone to wanting to put the cg in the ring finger to avoid a balance hole. I love that you can get recommendations but for us overthinkers I have difficulty understanding his thought process

Author:  2y2 [ Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

MegaMav wrote:
Drill angle to influence how early the ball revs up.
Pin to PAP distance on how fast or slow to burn off tilt and rotation.
VAL angle to control how long or short the hook zone is.

If you want a layout for your ball, contact a Hammer representative.
I am not familiar with their products.


In the MoRich Dual Angle document it states the contrary, it says that VAL angle determines how quick the ball revs and how fast it transitions. And it says that Drill angle determines how soon the ball rolls. Am I getting something wrong?

Author:  MegaMav [ Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The low flare layout on asymmetrical balls

2y2 wrote:

In the MoRich Dual Angle document it states the contrary, it says that VAL angle determines how quick the ball revs and how fast it transitions. And it says that Drill angle determines how soon the ball rolls. Am I getting something wrong?


Its all a system, when the ball revs up is determined by when the migrating PAP crosses the pin to spin line.
How fast or slow that happens is determined by any of the 3 factors combined.
You can speed it up or slow it down with the VAL and Pin to PAP distance.
I use Pin to PAP to control how fast the PAP migrates as well as tuning for tilt.
I use VAL angle to determine how long I want the hook zone.
Drill angle can get the pin to spin line closer or further away from the PAP.

You could do it in reverse with those 2 factors, Pin to PAP and VAL, but it will be harder to do as VAL angle with partial pins in fingers will be tougher to achieve some hook shapes. Its give and take, Pin to PAP distance and VAL angle both shape the hook zone.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/