Nano replacement

[fordman1]

What are some good balls that would replace a Nano. Looking for something with the same kind of reaction. Not a polished or pearl.

[JaxBowlingGuy]

If you're wanting to stay with the Storm line, the Alpha Crux looks like the closest

[RobLV1]

What are some good balls that would replace a Nano. Looking for something with the same kind of reaction. Not a polished or pearl.

You might also try looking at the core. The surface can always be changed, but the core can't.

[fordman1]

Much easier to start with matted or sanded than pearl. They are just too jumpy and speed sensitive. Thanks guys.

[RobLV1]

Much easier to start with matted or sanded than pearl. They are just too jumpy and speed sensitive. Thanks guys.

Take a look at the ball reviews for the Storm Rocket (hybrid) and the Sky Rocket (pearl). Both balls have the same surface and are rated exactly the same! The differences between solids, hybrids, and pearls are mainly because of the different OOB surfaces the come on the balls. If you were in the marketing department of a major ball manufacturer and found out that you could sell three of the same bowling ball just by changing the surface, wouldn't you do it? I sure would!

[Amyers]

Which Nano did you have? The Tour or the Virtual Gravity?

[fordman1]

Virtual Gravity Nano. I have tried the hyper cell skid and the Phaze and both are too jumpy.

[Amyers]

Virtual Gravity Nano. I have tried the hyper cell skid and the Phaze and both are too jumpy.

Glad to hear it's the VG as their really isn't anything out there like the Tour. The Lock is by far the closest ball to the VG Nano on the Market. If it digs in too much change the surface to 4K. Similar RG, Diff, and PSA.

The Phaze and the Skid are much different balls than the VG Nano. The Phaze II would give you a closer look than the original Phaze but in a symmetrical core it's not going to spin up the same way the VG does.

My guestimate would be that the GI-15 Hybrid cover isn't much different than the ERG Nano on the VG. The regular ERG cover is just below GI-15 on the chart add in the Nano particles my guess is you have GI-15 or something so close as to be indistinguishable.

[JaxBowlingGuy]

Glad to hear it's the VG as their really isn't anything out there like the Tour. The Lock is by far the closest ball to the VG Nano on the Market. If it digs in too much change the surface to 4K. Similar RG, Diff, and PSA.

The Phaze and the Skid are much different balls than the VG Nano. The Phaze II would give you a closer look than the original Phaze but in a symmetrical core it's not going to spin up the same way the VG does.

My guestimate would be that the GI-15 Hybrid cover isn't much different than the ERG Nano on the VG. The regular ERG cover is just below GI-15 on the chart add in the Nano particles my guess is you have GI-15 or something so close as to be indistinguishable.

Not so sure on the "by far the closest on the market". If looking just at ball numbers the lock has the same RG, but a greater differential than the Alpha Crux. Also the Lock is 2/3 pearl cover where the Alpha is a solid (like the nano)

VG Nano- 2.48 & .048
Lock - 2.48 & .054
Alpha - 2.50 & .052

[JaxBowlingGuy]

There's "give and take" with both balls when comparing to the VG Nano though

http://i1204.photobucket.com/albums/bb407/gunsnjax/9E97FD87-4603-448D-A8E3-D3D5F9F328C7_zpsrvoftzqh.png (http://s1204.photobucket.com/user/gunsnjax/media/9E97FD87-4603-448D-A8E3-D3D5F9F328C7_zpsrvoftzqh.png.html)

[Amyers]

Not so sure on the "by far the closest on the market". If looking just at ball numbers the lock has the same RG, but a greater differential than the Alpha Crux. Also the Lock is 2/3 pearl cover where the Alpha is a solid (like the nano)

VG Nano- 2.48 & .048
Lock - 2.48 & .054
Alpha - 2.50 & .052

Well after further review you have a point but at the OOB cover the Alpha is significantly earlier than the Lock or the VG Nano were. Not that you couldn't change that. If you adjusted the Alpha to 4k it would probably be close Just from my observation the roll of the Lock is closer to the VG than the Alpha but that is subjective and just my personal opinion and I've never seen a alpha at 4k to be sure it could just be surface differences that make it appear that way to me.

The Intermediate differentials are close on the Lock also

Lock- .18
Alpha- .17
VG- .20

I'm not sure that's enough to really make much difference but the Rad-x core is more aggressive than the Catalyst core in the Alpha. Even all these years later the Shape Lock HD core in the VG is listed as the 3rd most aggressive core Storm has made. I will agree it's closer than I originally thought and either could work. Probably save a little money with the Lock too though.

[RobLV1]

The one element that you are all failing to consider is the shape of the core. The Nano and the Alpha Crux both have roundish cores with similar designs. The Lock has a core that is totally different. I think that the similar core shapes along with the solid covers and surface adjustments should give you more of what you are looking for with the Alpha Crux.

[Amyers]

The one element that you are all failing to consider is the shape of the core. The Nano and the Alpha Crux both have roundish cores with similar designs. The Lock has a core that is totally different. I think that the similar core shapes along with the solid covers and surface adjustments should give you more of what you are looking for with the Alpha Crux.

Could be anybody know any good storm staffers to ask? LOL. At this point I believe either ball could work with proper cover adjustments. Might post this over on ball reviews and see if any of the staffers have an opinion it's a really good question.

[fordman1]

Thanks for the advice gentlemen.

[Amyers]

I did post this over in ball reviews and got the general opinion that if the current storm balls the lock was the closest.

They also felt that the 900 global dream big was an even better alternative if you could find one.

[RobLV1]

Could be anybody know any good storm staffers to ask? LOL. At this point I believe either ball could work with proper cover adjustments. Might post this over on ball reviews and see if any of the staffers have an opinion it's a really good question.

Of course you're right. After all, surface is 75% of ball reaction. Forget about the core. Ever try to drive your car on 75% of its tires?

[Mike White]

Of course you're right. After all, surface is 75% of ball reaction. Forget about the core. Ever try to drive your car on 75% of its tires?

What about comparing a Hammer Black Widow Red Legend to the Widow Spare.

Seems like the surface is making up far more than 75% of the difference.

[RobLV1]

What about comparing a Hammer Black Widow Red Legend to the Widow Spare.

Seems like the surface is making up far more than 75% of the difference.

With the original question, we're talking about two different reactive resin balls, not a reactive resin and a plastic.

[Amyers]

Of course you're right. After all, surface is 75% of ball reaction. Forget about the core. Ever try to drive your car on 75% of its tires?

I'm not saying one is right and one is wrong. I just relayed the opinion on ballreviews. To my eye the lock also look more like the virtual gravity shape but I've never seen an alpha with less surface so it possible.

[JaxBowlingGuy]

Having thrown the Lock and Alpha, I'll say the lock was more angular/snappy on the back. The Alpha would start to make the turn earlier and seemed to handle more volume

[Mike White]

Not so sure on the "by far the closest on the market". If looking just at ball numbers the lock has the same RG, but a greater differential than the Alpha Crux. Also the Lock is 2/3 pearl cover where the Alpha is a solid (like the nano)

VG Nano- 2.48 & .048
Lock - 2.48 & .054
Alpha - 2.50 & .052

Storm, are you serious with this?

Lock differs by 0.000 in low RG and 0.006 in differential
Alpha differs by 0.020 in low RG and 0.004 in differential.

I'm pretty sure that 0.020 difference in RG is more significant than the 0.002 difference in differential.