Is Disturbed stronger then Marvel S?

[barcar]

I have both balls drilled the same and I thought the Marvel S was the stronger of the two balls, but at this point, I am seeing about a 3 board difference with the Disturbed being the stronger on a THS pattern.
Any one else see the same thing?

[Amyers]

The disturbed should hook earlier than the marvel s but the marvel is the stronger of the two balls. Your marvel s is most likely burning up a little which is reducing your hook. The marvel s is a heavy oil ball, the disturbed is heavy medium. You may need to move farther inside too more oil for the marvel s or apply some polish too it to help get it through the heads a little easier.

[RobLV1]

If there is one habitual terminology that I would like to see eliminated from bowling altogether, it is this nonsense about describing balls as "strong" or "weak." Bowling balls react the way they do because of only two things: friction and resistance. Resistance results from the radius of gyration, and the amount of friction results from everything else. As we have said many times on this site, one ball does not hook more than another, it just hooks sooner. Of the two balls that you are asking about, the Marvel S, with an rg of 2.48 is designed to roll sooner than the Disturbed with an rg of 2.50. Both balls have symmetrical cores and solid reactive covers. The Marvel S, with a differential of 0.050 is a little more aggressive than the Disturbed with a differential of 0.043.

When you start to look at balls in terms of how aggressive they are in terms of when and where they react to the lane rather than how strong or weak they are, you will begin to understand ball motion. If you took both of these balls, drilled the same, and with the same surface on them, and tried them on a long sport pattern with a high volume of oil, you would probably find the Marvel S to be "stronger." If you tried both balls on a shorter pattern with less volume, you would probably find the Disturbed to be "stronger," based solely on its ability to store a little more energy for the backend reaction.

Bowling balls aren't magic. One doesn't go to the gym and get strong, and the other isn't a couch potato that has become weak. They are just different, and meant for different lane conditions and bowler styles.

[MICHAEL]

If there is one habitual terminology that I would like to see eliminated from bowling altogether, it is this nonsense about describing balls as "strong" or "weak.
Bowling balls react the way they do because of only two things: friction and resistance. Resistance results from the radius of gyration, and the amount of friction results from everything else. As we have said many times on this site, one ball does not hook more than another, it just hooks sooner. Of the two balls that you are asking about, the Marvel S, with an rg of 2.48 is designed to roll sooner than the Disturbed with an rg of 2.50. Both balls have symmetrical cores and solid reactive covers. The Marvel S, with a differential of 0.050 is a little more aggressive than the Disturbed with a differential of 0.043.

When you start to look at balls in terms of how aggressive they are in terms of when and where they react to the lane rather than how strong or weak they are, you will begin to understand ball motion. If you took both of these balls, drilled the same, and with the same surface on them, and tried them on a long sport pattern with a high volume of oil, you would probably find the Marvel S to be "stronger." If you tried both balls on a shorter pattern with less volume, you would probably find the Disturbed to be "stronger," based solely on its ability to store a little more energy for the backend reaction.

Bowling balls aren't magic. One doesn't go to the gym and get strong, and the other isn't a couch potato that has become weak. They are just different, and meant for different lane conditions and bowler styles.


VERY good point, BUT I think Strong or Weak in 90 percent of the cases on this site are in regards to House Oil! I know there are some that bowl sports patterns, and the length of oil has a barring on if a ball breaks early or late ect ect... but most on ( this site), buy their ball for standard,, common house patterns, (what ever that might be) short oil 34,35 feet, I imagine.

I think almost all the strengths or perfect scales are in regards to house oil, on bowlingball.com. It would be cool to see the balls reaction on different patterns, including SPORTS Oil!

Some bowling balls, are stronger Rob: This is the reason why: http://i1243.photobucket.com/albums/gg546/imagine686868/globe_earth_cartoon_01S021_zpsabe9eec6.jpg (http://s1243.photobucket.com/user/imagine686868/media/globe_earth_cartoon_01S021_zpsabe9eec6.jpg.html)

[mike_thomas93]

I agree too. Out of the box, Amyers's correct, the marvel s is stronger than the disturbed, but the characteristics can change easily if any tweakings were to be involved. (shine, surface, abralon, etc.)

[RobLV1]

Bowling on a THS isn't the issue. The issue becomes the relative aggressiveness of the ball in relation to how the bowler plays the THS. If he's playing outside the oil from the arrows, the ball is going to burn up much earlier than if he is playing the third arrow out to 8 past the pattern. The terms weak or strong in terms of bowling balls does nothing but confuse the issue. Who, in our society, wants something that is "weak"?

[MICHAEL]

Bowling on a THS isn't the issue. The issue becomes the relative aggressiveness of the ball in relation to how the bowler plays the THS. If he's playing outside the oil from the arrows, the ball is going to burn up much earlier than if he is playing the third arrow out to 8 past the pattern. The terms weak or strong in terms of bowling balls does nothing but confuse the issue. Who, in our society, wants something that is "weak"?

I hear you mention BURN UP a lot.... yet you don't like polish on ball. I find a big difference between a 4000 finish and a 1500 with polish! My best series all were with pearl l balls, V.G. Nanno, and IQ pearl, highly polished? I have experimented with 4000 finish but it seems to me the balls burn up faster without the polish????

Does POLISH deserve the bad stigma you seem to place on it? doesn't polish HELP keep a ball from burning up?

I know that IQ Pearl that gave my first 300, was not getting the job done, until the Pro Shop guy told me to get some Shine and Clean, then the magic came back, and the ball did its thing,,, skid, hook, and roll! Before the polish, it just seemed to burn up, nothing at the rear end!

[RobLV1]

Again, it's the way you choose to play the lanes. If you play in the dirt, then, yes, polish helps to keep the ball from burning up (just not long enough in most cases). I choose to play more in the oil, so I tend to use balls with more surface, though I will occasionally use a polished ball if it has a core that is early rolling and needs a little help, even playing in the oil.

[Amyers]

Rob is absolutely correct where you play on the lanes is part of determining what surface will work along with the conditions your playing on and your speed and revs. Playing outside you need less surface on the ball playing inside you have to have some surface or the ball will not start to hook.

As far as the weak strong thing goes it's just terminology it may not be the best but it works. I don't care if a ball is "strong" "aggressive" "weak" or any other terminology as long as it works. My euphoria is much weaker than my asylum but on the right condition the euphoria works better. I have no problem with a bag full of "weak" balls as long as they suit the condition I'm bowling on.

[barcar]

Ok using strong or weak was incorrect on my part.
It does sound like the Marvel is rated more aggressive of the two.
As far as where I am playing, I am having to play over the third arrow, out to 6-8.
In the past I have been more of a second arrow, down and in style tweener.
I am having to play far deeper and maintain more speed with the Disturbed.

[bubba809]

I too have had the most success in bowling when I use a polish on my ball. No matter what the drill pattern or surface change, I get the best results with a polish on the ball. I do realize it is 100 % based on MY style and MY way I throw the ball. Here is the funny thing though...I have two balls I've been messing with lately. A Jet Black Taboo and an Optimus. I have started from the top, 4000 then shine. Ball wasn't breaking soon enough. Just 4000. Ball still was traveling too far the lane and I was forced to play a down and in shot (which I hate). 2000 w/ shine...still didn't bite soon enough. Then I tried 1000 grit with a deep shine...BINGO. More of a "rounded" controlled arc but the highest scores by far FOR MY STYLE. My question is to Iceman or whomever, is this a bad thing?? I know people will say hey, as long as your getting the scores....I just feel with my style I HAVE to have that early skid a shine provides and I have to have that low grit to begin an earlier roll. I am not definitely not as consistent with a higher grit surface, again, for my particular style.

Any thought or comments on this as it's been driving me crazy?

Thanks

[RobLV1]

The surface on a bowling ball is not just the last step in the process, it's the combination of all of the steps involved. It's not like sanding wood where you automatically start with the coarsest grit sandpaper and work your way up to the finest. Unless a ball is rediculously early-rolling as compared to the style of the bowler, using a fine surface and then polishing it usually doesn't work. Just for knowledge sake, try doing what you did with the polish over the 1000 surface using a very light/short application of 4000 to finish it off. You might be pleasantly surprised.

[Amyers]

Ok using strong or weak was incorrect on my part.
It does sound like the Marvel is rated more aggressive of the two.
As far as where I am playing, I am having to play over the third arrow, out to 6-8.
In the past I have been more of a second arrow, down and in style tweener.
I am having to play far deeper and maintain more speed with the Disturbed.

I think what you are seeing here is related to what we were talking about earlier you are farther left with the disturbed because of its surface. Balls with more surface need to be kept into the oil longer than polished balls do. If you start a high surface ball out in the dry it will start to hook to early unless you are a very high speed or low rev bowler. The Marvel-S is allowing you to move farther right and throw it because the pearl finish on it allows it to get farther down the lane before the friction starts to make it hook. Thus it appears the Disturbed is stronger because you are farther left when you throw it. Your Marvel-S may actually be "hooking" more boards just from a different location on the lane.

There is more involved with the lines you play with a ball than just overall strength of the ball.

[RobLV1]

Marvel S is a solid.

[barcar]

Well I haven't really messed around with the surface, but after reading what folks have been posting, I think it is time.
I really do thank every one for their info, as I have been out of bowling for about 25 years , and only just started back, about 5 years ago, and have slowly been trying to build up my game and ball knowledge.

[Amyers]

Marvel S is a solid.

You are correct I was referring to the 3000 grit finish on the Marvel-S vs the 2000 grit finish on the disturbed but should not have said polished.